subscribe

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

Annotations already convey idempotency and non-read-only status. The description adds context beyond those hints: subscriptions are not persistent across connection gaps ('Subscribe again after a connection gap') and may require extra authentication scopes. However, it does not describe what the response looks like or behavior on duplicate subscriptions, which are minor gaps given the idempotentHint true.

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 compact sentences each carry distinct information: purpose, parameter requirements, event retrieval, resubscription, and scope prerequisites. There is no redundancy or filler, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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?

Given the moderate complexity (3 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the essential call flow and constraints. Missing are a full event-to-ID mapping and what response to expect after subscribing, but the presence of get_events implies the read path. Overall, an agent can invoke it correctly in most cases.

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. It clarifies that channel events require channel_id and GUILD_STATUS requires guild_id, which is useful, but it does not map out which of the 23 enum events qualify as 'channel events.' This leaves ambiguity for an agent invoking with only the enum list and no further guidance.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Subscribe to an RPC event.' It clearly distinguishes this from siblings by noting the complementary actions of reading events with get_events and resubscribing after gaps, so an agent can tell it apart from unsubscribe and get_events without ambiguity.

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?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: subscribe to start receiving events, then read with get_events, and resubscribe after a connection gap. It also mentions 'Additional Discord scopes may be required,' which is a prerequisite condition. This is concrete usage guidance beyond a generic purpose statement.

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