update_subscription_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the implications of each status (e.g., paused means no billing, archived means ended). However, it does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether billing stops immediately), required permissions, error handling, or idempotency.

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: one sentence followed by a list of status meanings. It is front-loaded with the action and HTTP method, and every sentence adds value without unnecessary words.

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 tool with two required parameters, the description is fairly complete for basic usage. However, it does not mention the response format, success indicators, or error cases, which would be helpful given the lack of an output schema.

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 has 100% description coverage, already explaining the required parameters and status meanings. The description adds the HTTP method and path but largely repeats schema information. Thus, it adds minimal value beyond the schema, warranting a baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Update a subscription status') and the resource ('subscription status'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like delete_subscription and update_subscription by providing specific status meanings, especially noting that 'archived' should be used instead of delete.

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 guidance on when to use each status value, e.g., 'archived – use instead of delete when ending' and 'requestPayment – subscription is awaiting payment method or payment.' However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with other update tools like update_subscription or provide cases where it should not be used.

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