Get subscription item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on what a subscription item contains, whether 'include' expands the payload, or any access/auth caveat — so it earns no credit for behavioral context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, which is structurally sound. It is arguably under-specified rather than over-long, but no sentence wastes space.

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 read-only getter with a fully documented schema and annotations carrying the safety profile, minimal prose is defensible. Still, with no output schema and no explanation of the account/include parameters' effect on results, the description leaves the agent to rely entirely on structured fields.

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%: id, account, and include are each documented in the schema with format and constraints. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('the subscription item') keyed by ID, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like list_subscription_items, get_subscription_item_current_usage, or update_subscription_item — the agent must infer the difference from tool names alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the closely related siblings (list_subscription_items, get_subscription_item_current_usage). The 'given ID' phrasing implies a lookup-by-identifier use case, but nothing is stated explicitly.

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