Get subscriber

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the bar is lower. The description still adds value beyond them by naming the required scope (view_sales) and the 'no local effect approval required' workflow fact, neither of which is captured in the 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?

Three short clauses, front-loaded with the operation and followed by endpoint, scope, and approval facts. Slightly telegraphic ('Reviewed native') but no wasted sentences.

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 single-resource read with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies enough (endpoint, scope, approval behavior) for correct invocation. Only the relationship to list_subscribers is left unaddressed.

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 100% and both parameters (account, subscriber_id) are documented in the schema with pattern and length constraints. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 first sentence 'Get subscriber' merely restates the tool name and title. The added 'native GET /subscribers/:id' mapping identifies the concrete operation, but the description never differentiates this from list_subscribers or get_user, so the agent gets a resource but no scoping distinction.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, and no sibling (e.g. list_subscribers) is named as an alternative. The 'scope: view_sales' note implies the required permission context, which is the only usage signal present.

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