get_subscription

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the response includes delivery log details (videoId, status, per-attempt HTTP results). However, it does not discuss permissions, error conditions, or whether the tool is read-only, which would be helpful for a get operation.

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: the first defines the action and output, the second gives the use case. No redundant words. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given the tool has a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure (delivery log with specific fields). It could mention more about error handling or the scope of 'recent', but it's largely complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'id' parameter with a clear description ('The subscription id (uuid).'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter beyond what's in the schema, so baseline 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 starts with 'Get one subscription including its recent delivery log', clearly specifying the action (get) and resource (subscription with delivery log). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_subscriptions (list many) and create_subscription (create). The inclusion of 'recent delivery log' adds specific scope.

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?

States explicitly 'Use this to check whether webhooks are arriving', providing a clear use case. It doesn't mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives like test_subscription, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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