seerr_get_user_push_subscription

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation, and the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond that. No mention of auth requirements, failure modes, or return behavior. There is no contradiction with 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 a single short sentence with the verb front-loaded. It is concise and free of fluff, though the brevity sacrifices important clarifying details.

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 tool's low complexity and the presence of an output schema and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about how this tool relates to sibling push-subscription tools and does not clarify that it retrieves a single subscription by user_id and endpoint.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain either parameter. 'user_id' is minimally implied by 'for a user', but 'endpoint' remains ambiguous (e.g., URL format, device identifier). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('web push notification settings for a user'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'seerr_list_user_push_subscriptions' (plural) by implying a single subscription, though this is not explicit.

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 for when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'seerr_list_user_push_subscriptions' (listing all) or 'seerr_register_push_subscription' (creating). The description only states the operation, not its context.

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