rh11_account_get_subscription

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds value by enumerating the specific data fields returned (plan label, fee, discount, wallet usage), giving agents a clearer expectation of the response without any contradiction.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the action ('Get') and resource ('Rhodium11 subscription info') while parenthetically listing key return fields. No redundant or filler 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?

This is a simple read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema. The description fully covers what the tool does and the nature of the returned information, making it adequate for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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, so the input schema is trivially complete. The description does not need to explain parameter syntax or defaults, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description's focus on output fields 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 uses a specific verb and resource: "Get Rhodium11 subscription info" with a clear scope including plan label, fee, discount, and wallet usage. This distinguishes it from siblings like rh11_account_get (general account) and rh11_wallet_get_balance (wallet balance).

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when subscription details are needed. There is no explicit exclusion or alternative mentioned, but the context is obvious given the sibling names and the description's specificity.

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