play_list_subscriptionsRetrieve every subscription product for an Android app using the Play Subscriptions API v2. Pass a package name to browse and paginate through all available offerings.
Lists all subscription products for an app (Play Subscriptions API v2).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageToken | No | ||
| packageName | Yes | Play Console package name, e.g. "com.example.app" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, does not mention pagination despite a pageToken parameter, and does not describe auth or quota behavior.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly why other dimensions are thin.
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 list tool with pagination, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should at least note pagination and return shape. Neither is covered, leaving the agent under-informed about a call it must compose 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?
Schema coverage is only 50%: packageName is documented in the schema but pageToken has no description anywhere. The description adds no parameter meaning, so the pagination mechanism (whether pageToken is an input cursor or output token) remains ambiguous.
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?
States a specific verb (Lists) and resource (subscription products) scoped to an app, and pins the API version. It distinguishes itself from play_get_subscription (singular) by the word 'all', though it doesn't explicitly name the related in-app-product tool.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this versus play_get_subscription or play_list_inapp_products, and no mention of prerequisites such as an edit being required or which package to target. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.