submit_subscription

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions forwarding data and receiving an ID, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., idempotency, error handling, rollback, or rate limits). Minimal behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and result. No unnecessary words or redundant 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?

Despite high schema coverage and no output schema, the description lacks completeness for a 20-parameter submission tool. It does not explain return value format, possible errors, validation rules, or dependencies on prior steps (e.g., selecting a tariff). Leaves important gaps for the agent.

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 95%, so the schema already documents parameters well. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the tool's general purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description does not degrade but also does not enhance.

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 tool sends a request to activate a new energy tariff and receives a subscription ID. It is distinct from sibling tools which calculate savings, get offers, or check status, providing a specific verb-resource pair.

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 implies usage when submitting a selected tariff (via tariff_id from calculate_energy_savings), but does not explicitly state prerequisites, when to avoid using it, or alternatives. No guidance on ordering or context.

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