subscriptions_delete_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: not whether deletion is irreversible, what happens to existing subscribers or related resources (localizations, prices, offer codes), or what permissions are required. Only the HTTP verb hints at mutation.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, but the same method and path are repeated twice in parentheses with zero added information, which is wasted text rather than earned conciseness.

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 destructive, single-parameter operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum state irreversibility and any cascading effects. It supplies none of that, leaving the agent reliant on inference from the tool name.

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 is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents "the id of the requested resource." The description adds no format, constraint, or semantic detail, so the baseline 3 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 text is essentially the tool name restated as an HTTP method plus path ("DELETE /v1/subscriptions/{id}"), duplicated verbatim in parentheses. It signals a delete on the subscriptions resource, but adds no scope, no differentiation from the many sibling delete_instance tools, and no insight beyond the identifier already in the name.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is given. An agent cannot tell from the description when deleting a subscription is appropriate versus updating or archiving it, nor what prerequisites apply.

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