list_subscriptions

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by saying the result shows licensable content and remaining quota, but says nothing about account scoping beyond 'the user's', auth requirements, or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the colon clause adds real information rather than restating the name. Slightly compressed rather than structured, but efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema and readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description covers what the agent needs: what is listed and roughly what comes back. The missing piece is a routing cue against the adjacent 'list_licenses' and 'list_collections' tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to convey and the baseline of 4 does not strictly apply; the description's only relevant semantic contribution is framing the output, which is largely redundant with the output schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the user's Shutterstock subscriptions') and adds scope detail about what the listing conveys (licensable content and remaining quota). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling 'list_licenses', so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by the verb and object: an agent can infer this is the read path for subscription status, but the description never says when to prefer it over 'list_licenses' or 'list_collections', nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.