Modify a subscription form

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds crucial behavioral context: it requires operator write opt-in and confirm:true, and warns that the operation may notify recipients or change tenant data. This meaningfully informs the agent about side effects and permissions.

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 dense but efficient: action, endpoint, body fields, reference, and safety requirements are all included with no filler. The key mutation purpose is front-loaded.

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 description covers purpose, valid body fields, endpoint, prerequisites, side effects, and points to the official reference. It does not describe the response shape, but there is no output schema and the reference URL helps fill that gap.

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 schema already documents path.planId and confirm, and the description adds a list of acceptable body fields (id, name, description, scope, form, etc.) that the generic body schema does not enumerate. It doesn't describe field types or defaults, but it does add practical meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Modify'), a clear resource ('a subscription form'), and the exact API endpoint, with a list of body fields. This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like create_a_subscription_form or get_a_subscription_form.

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 usage is implied by the verb and resource, and the description gives explicit prerequisites: operator write opt-in and confirm:true. However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with create_a_subscription_form or other alternatives, so the agent must infer the selection context.

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