bh_list_subscribers

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

The verb 'List' signals a read-only operation and indicates the result is a collection of subscribers, but with no annotations the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose output structure, pagination, privacy considerations, or whether the publication is contextually selected.

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 clear sentence with no filler, redundancy, or tangential information. It front-loads the action and the resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 zero-parameter tool this is mostly sufficient, but there is no output schema to clarify the return shape and no annotation to confirm safety. A brief note about which publication context applies or what fields appear in the subscriber list would make the definition 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?

The input schema is empty and the parameter count is zero, so there are no parameters requiring documentation. The description correctly adds no unnecessary parameter detail, and the baseline for zero parameters 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a unique resource ('newsletter subscribers') scoped to 'the publication,' making it clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like bh_list_posts and bh_get_stats. It adds information beyond the tool name without repeating it.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no mention of exclusions or preferred contexts. The only usage signal is implied by the resource name, so the agent must infer when this is the right tool.

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