list_subscriptions

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

No annotations are present, and the description gives no behavioral details beyond listing. It does not mention whether it requires authentication, if results are paginated, or what scope of subscriptions is returned.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words, perfectly sized for a simple tool.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could add context about authentication or scope to be more complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. With zero parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description adds nothing further because there is nothing to add.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Azure subscriptions you have access to', making the purpose explicit and easily distinguishable from sibling tools like 'list_vms' or 'list_resource_groups'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_resource_groups' or 'list_management_groups'. The description does not mention context or prerequisites.

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