List subscriptions

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

Annotations already establish the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description carries a lighter burden. It adds only the fact that results are paginated, which is useful but minimal; it says nothing about auth scope, rate limits, or filtering behavior beyond the schema.

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 wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than purposeful compactness.

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 an 11-filter list tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it explains nothing about the available filter dimensions or pagination semantics beyond what the schema states, leaning entirely on the schema and annotations to fill the 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?

Schema description coverage is 91%, so the schema already documents the 11 parameters (status, account, include, IDs, per_page, page) with reasonable detail. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, 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 description states a clear verb ('Returns') and resource ('subscriptions'), so the agent knows the basic operation. However, it adds essentially nothing beyond the name/title other than the word 'paginated', and it does not distinguish this from siblings like get_subscription, list_subscription_items, or list_subscription_invoices.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer usage purely from the name and the surrounding toolset.

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