get_zone_subscription

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does state the observable result (subscription tier values) and the decision-relevant meaning, but it does not explicitly cover error behavior, authentication/authorization needs, or confirm the read-only nature beyond the verb 'Get'. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the operation, the output values, and the purpose with zero filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it gives the required input domain, the possible output values, and the practical use. It only lacks explicit notes on error behaviors or authentication, which are minor for this simple getter.

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 input schema documents the single required parameter with 100% coverage ('The zone ID'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies because the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific verb and resource, plus the exact enumerated values (Free/Pro/Business/Enterprise), and explains the purpose of the result ('determines available features'). This distinguishes it from sibling zone getters such as get_zone or get_zone_settings.

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 phrase 'determines available features' clearly signals the context in which an agent should call this tool: when it needs to know what features a zone's plan supports. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple read-only tier lookup the implied usage is sufficiently clear.

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