Get Subscriptions Report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the report's dimensions and period, which is useful, but it does not explicitly state that the result is aggregated counts, how 'one month' is defined, or any other report-level caveats. It is partially transparent but not rich.

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?

A single, tightly worded sentence that front-loads the three subscription states and then gives the grouping and time period. There is no wasted text, and all key report dimensions are communicated efficiently.

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?

The schema fully documents both required parameters, and an output schema is present, so invocation and return-value structure are covered. The description supplies the report's content scope, though it could be more complete by naming alternatives or defining the metrics more precisely.

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 are fully documented in the schema with examples, so schema coverage is 100%. The description's 'for one month' loosely maps to the month parameter, but it adds no semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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?

The description states exactly what the report contains: new, cancelled, and active subscriptions, grouped by country, for a one-month period. The resource is unambiguous and clearly distinct from sibling reporting tools like get_installs_report or get_ratings_report.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this report versus alternatives such as list_subscriptions, get_subscription_status, or other report tools. No exclusions, prerequisites, or routing hints are provided, so the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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