Pay: subscriptions force expire

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint/readOnlyHint annotations by disclosing that the record is kept, that access is lost at once, and critically that it only mutates Anythink's record and does NOT affect Stripe or Apple billing. That last point materially changes agent decision-making and is not inferable from 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?

Front-loads the action and the admin requirement, then layers the recovery semantics, the billing-scope caveat, the alternative tool, and the confirmation warning. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers actor permissions, exact state change, data retention, external-system caveats, and the safer alternative — everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly and safely.

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% and the single `id` parameter is fully documented in the schema, including a pointer to pay_subscriptions_list for discovery. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('force-expire') and resource ('a subscription'), plus the immediate scope ('sets status to expired and clears its current period'). It is clearly distinguishable from the numerous pay_subscriptions_* siblings because it names exactly what state change occurs.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: names the alternative tool (`pay_subscriptions_cancel`) for stopping future charges, and adds a precondition ('check with the user before running it'). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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