subscription_settings_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing further — no note that this returns the subscription (end-user-facing) configuration rather than global app settings, and no indication of what is returned.

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 short phrase with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a no-argument read tool, though it is so terse that it barely qualifies as content.

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 simple, zero-parameter read with no output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves the agent guessing at what settings are returned. A sentence naming the setting categories would make it complete.

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 the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter surface for the description to clarify.

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 phrase states a verb ('Get') and a resource ('subscription settings'), so the operation is identifiable. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool name with no added scope, and it does not distinguish itself from look-alikes such as settings_get or subscription_info.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as subscription_settings_update or the general settings_get. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the read counterpart to the update tool.

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