Công cụ MONA subscription list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description's added value is limited to naming the returned fields (packages, renewal period, auto-renew), which is useful context given there is no output schema, but it discloses no pagination, auth, or filtering 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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the core action first and the returned fields second. The bilingual duplication ('Đọc các gói...' / 'List subscriptions') is redundant but costs only a few tokens.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with full annotation coverage, the description is adequate, and it partially compensates for the absent output schema by naming what is returned. It stops short of explaining ordering, scope (account vs. workspace), or pagination, which keeps it out of the top tier.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to document; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a no-argument, list-everything call.

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 and resource ('List subscriptions') and adds the content scope: current packages, renewal period, and auto-renew status. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling vibecloud_subscription_list, so an agent has no basis in the description for choosing between them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. The description never mentions cloud_subscription_update (its natural counterpart) or the duplicate vibecloud_subscription_list, leaving routing entirely to inference.

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