tokportal_cancel_account_managed_subscription

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

The description enriches the destructiveHint annotation by explaining what is destroyed (coverage, but payments are kept) and the financial consequences of reactivation. No contradictions 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 concise with three sentences, each conveying essential information. The first sentence immediately clarifies the purpose, making it front-loaded and efficient.

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 cancel/pause tool without an output schema, the description covers enough: action, effect, and financial implications. It might miss prompting about the need for an active subscription or the time to take effect, but this is minor given the sibling list and annotations.

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?

The input schema covers both parameters (id and idempotency_key) with clear descriptions, and the description adds context for the idempotency key via the tool's idempotentHint being false (though not stated). No additional parameter meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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 the tool pauses TokPortal coverage, blocks new and ongoing work, and details financial implications. It distinguishes itself from siblings like tokportal_reactivate_account_managed_subscription by describing the opposite action.

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?

It explains when to use (immediately blocking work) and mentions the cost conditions for later reactivation, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to other cancellation/update tools.

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