pricing__get_subscription_price

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: worldwide pricing is 'grouped by price so the answer stays readable, with the currency and the country codes in each group,' and it 'returns the price actually in effect' unlike subscriptions__prices__list which returns 'price-less stubs.' This discloses output formatting and a common pitfall.

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?

Every sentence adds value and is front-loaded with the core purpose. The description is dense but not verbose: it covers purpose, parameter behavior, alternative usage, and a caveat about subscriptions__prices__list in just four sentences. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple read-only getter, the description fully covers all usage scenarios, optional parameter behaviors, alternatives, and a key caveat about the alternative API. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described in detail. The description is complete for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The schema coverage is 100%, and the description reinforces parameter meanings with additional context: app can be name, bundle ID, or Apple ID (also in schema); omitting territory gives worldwide pricing 'grouped by price'; omitting subscription covers all subscriptions and enables answering price questions without product ID. The description adds usage nuance beyond the schema, though the schema already covers the basics.

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 starts with a clear statement of what the tool does: 'What a subscription costs customers today — in one country, or in every country at once.' It specifies the resource (subscription price) and scope (by country or worldwide), and the verb 'get' is implied in the name and description. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pricing__set_subscription_price and pricing__equalize_price by focusing on retrieval.

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?

The description explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use this instead of chaining apps__list / subscription_groups / prices calls.' It also explains when to include or omit each optional parameter, giving concrete scenarios like answering 'what does the weekly one cost' without knowing the product ID. This provides clear usage guidance relative to alternatives.

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