madeonsol_first_touch_subscriptions_update

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, consistent with 'Update'. However, the description does not disclose potential side effects, such as whether updating is_active triggers notifications or other actions. The openWorldHint suggests possible side effects, but the description fails to elaborate.

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?

The description is a single sentence, making it concise and front-loaded, but it omits important details like a list of updatable fields or behavioral notes. It achieves conciseness at the expense of completeness.

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 input schema's complexity (nested filters object, six parameters) and lack of output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, validation rules, or the effect of parameters like webhook_url or delivery_mode. The tool requires more context for correct invocation.

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?

With only 17% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value by highlighting the 'is_active' toggle. The other five parameters (name, filters, webhook_url, delivery_mode) remain undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the agent uncertain about their purpose and format.

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 action ('Update fields') and the resource ('first-touch subscription'), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get, and list. It also specifies the 'is_active' toggle and an access restriction ('ULTRA only'), but could be more explicit about the full scope of updatable fields.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'ULTRA only' as an access constraint but does not explain prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where another tool (e.g., create or delete) would be more appropriate.

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