get_automation_queue_subscriber

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: the subscriber is located by hashing the email, and it retrieves queue status. This adds value beyond annotations but does not disclose other behaviors like auth needs or rate limits.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses a clear structure with a short paragraph followed by an args list. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 an output schema, the description mentions returns. However, it lacks details on potential errors, prerequisites, or the hashing mechanism. The optional 'account' parameter is not addressed, and there is no guidance on when to use this vs list.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It explains the three required parameters (workflow_id, workflow_email_id, email_address) with clear roles but omits the optional 'account' parameter. Thus, it adds meaning to most but not all parameters.

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 tool gets a single subscriber from the queue of a classic automation email. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('subscriber'), and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'add_automation_queue_subscriber' (adds), 'get_automation_email_queue' (lists all), and 'get_automation_removed_subscriber' (gets removed).

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 implies the context (inspecting a specific subscriber's queue status) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_automation_email_queue'. No direct when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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