subscription_request_history_stats

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

With no annotations to indicate read-only or safety behavior, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get ... statistics' and gives no information about aggregation, time ranges, scope, response shape, or side effects. This is a minimal disclosure that does not meaningfully explain behavior.

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, front-loaded phrase with no wasted words. It is appropriately short for a parameterless tool, though slightly more detail about the nature of the statistics would improve completeness without harming conciseness.

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 0-parameter tool with no output schema, the description must explain what the statistics are and what the caller can expect. 'Statistics' alone is vague and leaves critical context missing, such as whether this returns counts, trends, or a breakdown by status/period.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The description correctly implies this is a parameterless call, matching the baseline for no-parameter tools.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies a distinct resource: subscription request history statistics. It distinguishes itself from sibling list/history tools through the word 'statistics', though it does not specify what those statistics are.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus related siblings like subscription_request_history_list or users_subscription_request_history. The implied use case is obtaining aggregated stats, but no explicit conditions, alternatives, or exclusions are stated.

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