mark_subscription_paid

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states that a payment is recorded and the billing date is advanced, but does not explain side effects like idempotency, validation, or whether it can be called multiple times. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 sentence that is clear, direct, and free of unnecessary information. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but not thorough. It omits context about when it is appropriate to call and what happens in edge cases. Sibling tools exist for related operations but lack explicit differentiation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning to the 'id' parameter beyond what the schema already provides ('Subscription ID'). No further parameter details are given.

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 specific verbs ('Record' and 'advance') and clearly identifies the resource ('a payment for the current billing period') and outcome. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'create_payment' which likely lacks subscription context, or 'update_subscription' which modifies subscription settings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'create_payment' or 'update_subscription'. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the subscription being active or not already paid, nor any exclusions.

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