remnawave_subscriptions_list

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

The label '(sensitive-read)' suggests caution but does not elaborate on required permissions, data returned, or side effects. With zero annotations, the description should disclose more about the sensitivity and scope.

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 extremely brief but not effectively concise; it omits crucial information. It should be expanded to cover essential usage details.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and complex sibling tools, the description fails to provide adequate context. The agent lacks guidance on how to construct requests and interpret responses.

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 0%, yet the description provides no explanation for parameters like payload, confirmToken, responseMode, or mutationApproved. The presence of confirmToken and mutationApproved on a list operation is unexplained and potentially confusing.

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 states 'subscriptions.list (sensitive-read)', indicating a listing action on subscriptions and hints at safety level. However, it lacks specificity on what is being listed (e.g., all subscriptions, filtered by criteria) and does not differentiate from sibling get tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_by_* or list from different contexts (users, profiles). The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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