get_offerings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Fetch' clearly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not mention potential errors, authorization requirements, or whether an empty list is returned for an invalid user ID. Basic safety is communicated, but richer behavioral context is lacking.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word is useful and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), and the description clearly states what is fetched ('available subscription offerings and packages') for a user. This is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and expected return, though explicit return format details are not provided.

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 input schema already documents the single parameter 'app_user_id' with a clear description, so schema coverage is high (100%). The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and specifies the resource 'available subscription offerings and packages for a user,' clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like get_subscriber or check_entitlement. The purpose is unambiguous and unique.

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 provides clear context that this tool retrieves offerings/packages for a specific user, which distinguishes it from the entitlement and subscriber sibling tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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