Subscribe to Snapshots

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

The description adds key behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Costs 1200 credits' and 'automatic' imply ongoing side effects and cost. This is valuable given the annotations only indicate non-read-only and open-world hints. It does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise, using four short sentences that each convey essential information: purpose, benefit, cost, and parameter expectation. No filler or redundant phrasing beyond what schema requires.

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 subscription tool with only two parameters, the description covers the main points: what it does, why use it, cost, and parameter types. It lacks details about the return value or how to cancel, but given the absence of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema already documents both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description's 'addresses with optional descriptions' merely restates the schema without adding deeper meaning (e.g., formats, constraints, or relationships). 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 action: 'Subscribe to automatic portfolio snapshots.' It identifies the resource (snapshots) and the purpose (historical tracking). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are all get_ or sync_ operations.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: 'Enables historical tracking.' This implies the tool is for setting up ongoing snapshots. However, it does not explicitly contrast with octav_get_historical or other alternatives, nor does it state when not to use it.

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