extend_organization_trial

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only says 'extend' without explaining side effects, permissions, or whether mutations are reversible. Critical behavioral details are absent.

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, punchy sentence that front-loads the admin role and applicable states. It is extremely concise, though it sacrifices behavioral detail.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations or output schema, so the description must compensate. It covers the admin role and states but leaves unanswered what the API does, whether days and until are mutually exclusive, and what the response contains. Incomplete for a tool with this 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 description coverage is 100% for the three parameters, and the schema already explains 'days' and 'until' and their alternatives. The tool description adds no parameter-specific guidance, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb 'extend' and identifies the resource as 'a trialing/past_due/canceled subscription', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_organization or update_membership. The 'Admin:' prefix adds role context. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 indicates the tool is for admin use and lists the subscription states it applies to (trialing/past_due/canceled), giving clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of full guidelines.

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