delete_subscription_offer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the operational constraint of inactivity and the read-only restriction, which are critical for safe usage. It does not detail side effects or irreversibility, but for a delete action, these are implicitly understood. The constraint information adds meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 remarkably concise: two sentences. The first states the purpose, the second packs the key constraints. No fluff, every word earns its place.

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 deletion tool with 4 well-documented parameters and an output schema (present), the description covers the necessary conditions (inactive, no subscribers, read-only). It doesn't explain the response format, but output schema handles that. It might benefit from mentioning that deletion is irreversible, but that's implied by 'delete'. Overall, it's sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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 100% with each parameter having a descriptive label (e.g., 'Subscription offer ID to delete'), so the schema already conveys parameter meanings. The description does not add further semantic detail about parameters, thus it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the verb (Delete) and the resource (subscription offer), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_subscription or delete_in_app_product. The scope is unambiguous and specific.

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 explicit conditions for use: 'Only inactive offers with no active subscribers can be deleted' and 'Disabled in read-only mode.' This tells the agent when it's appropriate to call and when to avoid it, though it doesn't name alternative tools like deactivate for actionable offers.

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