get_user_by_user_id_push_subscription_by_endpoint

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the GET method and path but does not disclose additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements, response behavior for missing endpoints, or how the endpoint is matched. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 a one-sentence purpose, followed by the HTTP path and an Args list. There is no filler, though the Args section largely restates what the input schema already provides.

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-parameter read tool with a rich output schema and strong annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. However, the semantics of the endpoint parameter are ambiguous, and there is no pointer to the plural sibling for listing all subscriptions, leaving some practical gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meaning, but it only labels user_id and endpoint as path parameters. It does not explain that endpoint is the full web push subscription endpoint URL or mention formatting/encoding concerns, so it adds little beyond the schema property names.

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 that the tool gets web push notification settings for a user, and the included GET path makes the target resource explicit. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling get_user_by_user_id_push_subscriptions, leaving differentiation to the tool name.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus retrieving all push subscriptions with get_user_by_user_id_push_subscriptions, or how it relates to register/delete push subscription tools. The only usage clue is the generic phrase 'for a user,' which does not help an agent choose among siblings.

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