Criar assinatura em um plano

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds behavioral nuance: the created subscription is in an incomplete state (without payment method), which is beyond basic mutation flags. No side effects or error conditions disclosed, but annotations suffice.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences that convey the core purpose and usage context without redundancy.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema (confirmed) and annotations, the description sufficiently explains the tool's role in the two-step flow and required state. It could mention prerequisites like an existing plan, but that is implied. Overall adequate for agent decision-making.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description hints at the plan id and incomplete payment state but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a subscription linked to an existing plan without completing payment method, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_one_step_subscription by positioning itself in a two-step flow before payment data association.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use no fluxo em duas etapas antes de associar os dados de cobrança do assinante' maps the tool to a specific sequence and alternative (create_one_step_subscription). Contextually clear when to use vs siblings.

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