get_subscription_logs

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination and that entries include status changes, renewals, payments, etc., but lacks details on authentication needs, rate limits, data freshness, or side effects (e.g., the tool is read-only, which is implied but 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes a concise list of log types. Every sentence adds value without 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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description explains the purpose and return type (pagination, log types), but does not specify the structure of log entries, ordering, or error scenarios. For a simple-read paginated list, this is adequate but could be more complete.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds context about pagination and log entry types, but does not add meaning to individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides. 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 begins with 'Get activity history for a subscription', which is a clear verb+resource pair. It also includes the HTTP method and path (GET /subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/logs) and mentions the types of log entries (status changes, renewals, payments). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_subscription_invoices or get_customer_logs.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_subscription_invoices or get_customer_logs. There is no 'when-to-use', 'when-not-to-use', or mention of prerequisites or context.

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