Deactivate Base Plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key consequence (existing subscribers keep their subscription) and the read-only restriction. It does not mention reversal, required permissions, or side effects on related offers, leaving gaps 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?

Three short sentences; the first states the action and primary effect, the second adds the most important exception, and the third adds a constraint. No filler or repetition.

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?

Combined with a fully described schema and an output schema, the description covers the core semantics and scope of the operation. It is not a 5 because it omits any guidance on re-activation, preconditions, or relationships to the sibling state-management tools.

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 100%, so the parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter-level guidance, matching the baseline for fully covered schemas.

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?

States a specific verb ('Deactivate') and resource ('subscription base plan') and clarifies its intended effect ('making it unavailable to new subscribers'). This distinguishes it from delete_base_plan and batch_update_base_plan_states, since it emphasizes that existing subscribers are unaffected.

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?

Gives clear context: use when the goal is to stop new subscriptions while grandfathering existing subscribers. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as activate_base_plan or delete_base_plan, so it stops short of a 5.

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