List subscriptions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's main behavioral contribution is clarifying that it lists recurring subscriptions specifically (not all subscriptions). It does not disclose details like whether canceled subscriptions are included, ordering, or pagination behavior—though limit/offset parameters hint at pagination. Overall, the description adds some context beyond annotations but not rich behavioral depth.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the core action and scope, then adds the optional filter. Every word is necessary; there is no fluff or redundancy. It is efficient and easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 params, 0 required, no output schema), the description covers the essential use case and filter option. The schema carries details like defaults and limits for pagination. However, it doesn't mention the default location behavior (env var) or what fields are returned, but since there's no output schema, the description is reasonably complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 description clarifies that contactId is a filter and that locationId scopes the list to a location, but it does not explain limit/offset beyond what the schema encodes. With only 25% schema description coverage (only locationId has a schema description), the description partially compensates but leaves pagination parameters undocumented in prose. The added value is modest.

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 lists recurring subscriptions per location, with an example (retainers). It distinguishes from singular retrieval tools like ghl_get_subscription and other list tools (invoices, products). The verb 'List' plus the resource and scope makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives context on when to use it: to list recurring subscriptions for a location, with optional contact filtering. It implies this is for multiple subscriptions rather than a single one, but it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like ghl_get_subscription for when a specific ID is known. Still, the scope and filter are clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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