Search subscribers

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real context the annotations don't: the query is a raw SQL expression scoped to the subscribers table, which implies string-syntax dependence and possible failure on invalid expressions. It says nothing about pagination behavior or result limits when query is omitted.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then the highest-value detail (query syntax) with illustrative examples. No filler; only minor cost is the two examples padding length slightly.

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?

A search tool with five parameters, no schema descriptions and no output schema needs more from the description than it gives. Four parameters governing pagination and filtering are undocumented anywhere, leaving the agent to guess at per_page caps and list_id semantics.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden and it only documents one of five parameters. The query explanation with two concrete examples is excellent, but page, per_page, list_id and subscription_status are left entirely unexplained.

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 (search) and resource (subscribers), and the query examples make the search domain unmistakable. It doesn't name distinctions from siblings like subscriber_get or subscribers_lists_change, but the plural/search framing is clear enough for an agent.

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?

'Omit query to list all' gives one conditional path, which is genuinely useful. There is no guidance on when to use this versus subscriber_get (single lookup) or how it relates to subscribers_lists_change, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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