find_subscriptions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only search but gives no details on what constitutes a subscription, how matches are determined, or what the output contains. The word 'find' suggests no side effects, but that is not explicit.

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?

One sentence with no filler; it is concise and front-loaded. The brevity is appropriate given the simple structure, though it contributes to the transparency gap.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the core action, but it does not explain the return format or edge cases, nor how subscriptions are defined. Given no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves some ambiguity.

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 fully documents csvPath with 'Path to Amex CSV file', and the description adds no extra meaning about parameter constraints or behavior. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 finds subscriptions within Amex transactions, using a specific verb and resource. The noun 'subscriptions' distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_anomalies or spending_by_category.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like find_anomalies or analyze_amex_spending, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The context is implied solely by the tool name.

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