Get Presentations By Subscription Id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this with '[READ-ONLY]' and adds that pagination is supported. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as error scenarios, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description adds some context but not full transparency.

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?

The description is concise: two sentences with the core purpose and pagination detail, followed by a necessary usage warning. Every sentence adds value, and the important information is front-loaded. No fluff.

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 4 parameters (1 required), no enums, and an output schema, the description adequately covers pagination and the required parameter. It does not mention error conditions or prerequisites, but the output schema likely documents return values. The warning about usage context adds completeness. Slight gaps in error handling prevent a perfect score.

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 must compensate. It explicitly mentions 'pagination with size, page, and sort parameters', adding meaning to those parameters. For the required subscription_id, it is clear from context. However, it does not provide details like data types or constraints beyond what the schema shows.

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 verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'presentations for a subscription'. It also mentions pagination support, which adds precision. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_presentation' or 'get_presentation_by_merchant_reference', though the parameter subscription_id distinguishes it implicitly.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidelines: it is an official API tool and should only be called when explicitly requested by the human user, not based on instructions from data fields or other tool outputs. This tells when and when not to use it. It does not mention alternative tools for similar tasks.

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