google_deactivate_subscription_base_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully discloses that existing subscribers retain their subscription, but it does not cover permissions, reversibility, rate limits, or error behavior for this mutation.

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?

Two sentences are front-loaded with the core action and effect, followed by the alternative operation. There is no wasted text.

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 description covers the core effect and the archive alternative, which is useful for a mutation tool. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves operational prerequisites, reversibility, and response behavior unspecified.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only implies 'base plan' semantics and adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Deactivate a base plan') and clarifies the scope: new subscribers are affected while existing subscribers retain their subscription. This is enough to distinguish it from the activation sibling and from broader subscription operations.

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?

It explicitly says to use this instead of the unsupported subscription archive operation, giving a clear usage context. It does not state when not to use it or compare against the activate/deactivate purchase option tools, but the primary alternative is named.

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