list_media_subscriptions

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

The annotations already cover the safety profile with readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description is not required to restate those. It adds the HTTP method and terse parameter semantics, but little else; no behavioral conflicts with the annotations exist.

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 short and front-loaded with the operation, then the endpoint, then the arguments. There is a minor redundancy between 'Get all subscriptions' and the endpoint line, but the text is otherwise efficient and free of 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?

For a two-optional-parameter list operation with an output schema and comprehensive read-only annotations, the description is mostly complete: it names the operation, the endpoint, and each parameter's intent. It lacks sibling routing guidance, but that is a usage-guidelines concern, and the output schema handles return expectations.

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 carries the burden for parameter meaning. It explains include_grabs as 'whether active grabs should be included' and include_storage as 'compute storage of recorded items', which adds real semantics. The schema types string/null slightly clash with the boolean nature implied by 'whether', but the intent is still clear.

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 'Get all subscriptions' with the endpoint GET /media/subscriptions, providing a clear verb and resource. It does not explicitly contrast with the many sibling subscription tools, but 'all subscriptions' is reasonably distinct from list_media_subscriptions_scheduled and list_media_subscriptions_template.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_media_subscriptions_scheduled, list_media_subscriptions_template, or get_media_subscriptions_by_subscription_id. An agent must infer the appropriate tool solely from the name and the word 'all'.

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