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 disclosure burden, and it discloses almost no behavior: nothing about read-only semantics, behavior when the account has no subscription (error vs empty), or what resellerContext changes. The only behavioral note ('compact=true by default') merely restates the schema default.

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, no filler, with the identification and the alternative-routing hint front-loaded. Every sentence carries information the agent can act on.

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 single-entity read with a fully documented schema, this is close to adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations the agent still lacks any sense of the returned payload's shape (beyond the compact flag) or failure mode for an unknown accountId.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented, including compact's payload-shape implication and resellerContext's optionality. The description adds the compact default but no meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('GetSubscription') and pins the lookup key ('by accountId'), so the agent knows this is a single-entity fetch. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the very similarly named siblings get_subscriptions and get_subscription_with_addons.

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?

One explicit routing hint is given ('Prefer list_company_subscriptions for company-wide lists'), which is genuinely useful. But the closest alternatives — get_subscriptions (plural list) and get_subscription_with_addons — are not addressed at all, leaving the agent to guess between near-identical names.

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