subscription_images_create_instance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about permissions, idempotency, side effects, or response shape. For a POST/create mutation this is a complete gap.

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?

It is short but wastes its one sentence by printing the route twice ('POST /v1/subscriptionImages (POST /v1/subscriptionImages)') and by front-loading a path instead of a purpose. Brevity here is under-specification, not efficiency.

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 create mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what a subscription image is and the effect of creating one. All it offers is an external OpenAPI schema reference and a duplicated route.

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 'body' parameter is already documented as components.schemas.SubscriptionImageCreateRequest, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description merely repeats that same pointer, adding no extra meaning, which places it at the baseline.

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 just restates the tool name as an HTTP route: 'POST /v1/subscriptionImages' duplicates the tool's own create_instance/subscription_images semantics and never states in natural language that it registers a subscription image. The verb is only inferable from the POST method, and nothing distinguishes it from the sibling subscription_images_v2_create_instance.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of when to prefer this v1 endpoint over the v2 sibling that appears in the tool list. The agent is given no routing information at all.

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