Get Subscriber

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds value by specifying the return fields (type, status, social handles), exceeding the safety profile provided by annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, followed by output description. Efficient and easy to scan.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the main functionality and return values. Slight gap on publication parameter meaning, but overall sufficient for a lookup tool.

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%, baseline 3. Description mentions lookup by email but does not explain the optional publication parameter beyond what the schema provides. No additional semantic clarity added.

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?

Clearly states the action (look up) and resource (subscriber by email), and lists the returned information (subscription details including type, status, social handles). Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_post and get_subscriber_counts.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. While lookup intent is clear, there are no exclusions or references to sibling tools (e.g., get_subscriber_counts) that perform similar but distinct functions.

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