List Subscription Offers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it only says the tool 'lists all offers.' It reveals nothing about pagination, result limits, whether inactive offers are included, or the meaning of the '-' wildcard, which is left to the schema. It does not contradict any annotations.

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 sentence with no wasted words; the verb and scope are front-loaded. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects the thinness of the content rather than the compression of rich detail.

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 output schema exists, so return value explanation is unnecessary, and the schema covers all parameters. But for a list operation, the description omits behavioral details like pagination and does not position the tool among the many subscription-offer siblings, leaving an agent under-informed about the conditions that select this call.

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%, with each of the three parameters individually documented, including the '-' wildcard behavior on base_plan_id. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('offers for a subscription base plan'), which distinguishes it from write operations like create_subscription_offer and from single-item reads like get_subscription_offer. However, it does not explicitly disambiguate from the closely named sibling list_purchase_option_offers, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_subscription_offer, list_purchase_option_offers, or batch_get_subscription_offers. An agent facing the very large sibling list gets no routing hints about which tool fits which scenario.

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