Google Play MCP

get_subscription

Retrieve one subscription's base plans, prices, listings, and tax settings by app package and product ID; read-only.

Instructions

Read one subscription (base plans, prices, listings, tax settings). Read-only.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "packageName": "<packageName>",
      "productId": "<productId>"
    },
    "name": "get_subscription"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`productId`	Yes	Subscription product id
`packageName`	Yes	Application id (package name), e.g. com.example.app

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the whole burden; it does disclose read-only semantics and the shape of the returned data (base plans, prices, listings, tax settings). It says nothing about permission requirements, behavior when the product is missing, or whether an edit context is needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, both front-loaded and free of filler: the first defines the operation and its payload, the second states the safety profile. Nothing is redundant or buried.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter read with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns and that it is non-mutating. Minor gaps remain around permission requirements and error/failure behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both required params are documented in the schema with an example package name format. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one subscription') and enumerates the sub-resources included (base plans, prices, listings, tax settings), so the agent knows what it gets back. It does not explicitly name the create/update/delete_subscription siblings it is the read counterpart to, leaving differentiation to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: fetch a single subscription by packageName + productId. 'Read-only' signals it is the safe read in a family containing mutations, but no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives are given.

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

Deploy Server