get_subscription

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get details', implying a read operation, but does not mention what details are returned, whether the operation is safe (read-only), or whether it may fail if the subscription does not exist or requires specific permissions. Given the lack of annotations, this is a significant gap for a retrieval operation.

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 clearly states the purpose without extra fluff. It is well-structured and front-loaded, fitting the expectation for a simple retrieval tool.

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 with only 2 parameters and has an output schema (though not shown, the context indicates it exists), which reduces the need for return value explanation. However, the description does not mention any error conditions, required permissions, or distinctions from similar tools, leaving some gaps for an agent that might need to choose between multiple get_subscription-related tools. Given the moderate complexity and lack of annotations, a 3 is fair.

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 description coverage is 100%: both 'product_id' and 'package_name' are documented with brief descriptions. The description adds no additional param context, so it does not exceed what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema covers all parameters, though the description could have added context on required uniqueness or combination but does not.

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 tool retrieves details for a specific subscription product, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('subscription product'). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'list_subscriptions' which lists all subscriptions, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_subscription_status' or 'get_subscription_offer', both of which might be ambiguously related.

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 implies usage for fetching a single subscription, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'list_subscriptions' for multiple subscriptions or 'get_subscription_status' for status-specific details. The context of 'specific' hints at use when a known product_id is available, but this is not explicitly stated.

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