tochka_subscription_create

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

Beyond the `openWorldHint` annotation, the description only states it creates a recurring subscription. No mention of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens on success/failure. An incomplete behavioral picture for a write operation.

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?

Extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose, sibling link, then a clean bullet list of parameters. No wasted words, logically structured.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and all parameters. With an output schema (not shown) available, lack of return value explanation is acceptable. However, a brief example or note on success behavior would enhance completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing clear explanations and constraints for all 10 parameters (e.g., '9 chars', '> 0', '1-140 chars', optionality). Every parameter is addressed.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Create recurring payment subscription.' Distinguishes from sibling `tochka_subscription_with_receipt` by mentioning the fiscal receipt alternative.

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?

Explicitly says when to use sibling tool (`tochka_subscription_with_receipt`). Provides parameter constraints (e.g., '9 chars', '> 0', '1-140 chars') but lacks broader usage context like prerequisites or conditions.

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