ls_get_subscription

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint. Description adds value by specifying included fields (status, billing interval, renewal date, customer info), but does not disclose authentication requirements or rate limits, which are not critical given the safe nature of the operation.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, clearly conveys the tool's purpose and key return fields.

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 no output schema, description lists some returned fields, providing context for expected data. However, could mention error cases or additional response structure. Overall sufficient for a simple get tool with clear constraints.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so description adds no extra semantic detail beyond what schema provides. Baseline score of 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?

Description clearly states 'Get a specific subscription by ID' with a specific verb and resource, and lists included fields (status, billing interval, renewal date, customer info), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ls_list_subscriptions, ls_update_subscription, and ls_cancel_subscription.

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?

Description implies usage for fetching a single subscription by ID, but does not explicitly state when to use over siblings or provide exclusion criteria. No mention of when to use alternative tools like ls_list_subscriptions for multiple subscriptions.

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