Terminate a subscription (write)

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral nuance: by default termination is not immediate but takes effect at the end of the current term, and that the subscription cannot be restarted after termination. This is critical for correct usage and is clearly stated.

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 concise yet rich, packing critical behavioral details into three sentences. It front-loads the key fact (WRITE) and default behavior, then provides parameter guidance and a warning. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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 write operation with no output schema and no annotations, this description covers all necessary aspects: what the tool does, when to use it, behavioral nuances, parameter semantics, and cautions. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and avoid misuse.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the effect of each parameter (immediate vs. termination_date vs. default) and their implications (e.g., immediate ends now, termination_date overrides term end). This adds value beyond the 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 ('Terminates'), resource ('ProAbono subscription'), and the fact that this is a write operation. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools (suspend_subscription and its reversibility), making it easy for an agent to select the right tool.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (to terminate, with options for immediate, scheduled, or end-of-term), and when not to: 'suspend_subscription is the reversible one' for cases needing reversibility. It also warns against the common mistake of revoking access immediately, providing clear usage context.

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