sherweb_subscriptions_change_quantity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It mentions the mutation ('modifies the subscription') and billing impact, but does not state required permissions, reversibility, whether changes are prorated, validation rules for quantity, or what happens on failure.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The billing-impact note is relevant and earns its place. Efficient and front-loaded with the main action.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should disclose side effects, validation constraints, permission requirements, and expected return behavior. It only notes billing impact and modification. It is incomplete for an operation with billing consequences.

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%, so the schema already documents all 3 parameters. The description adds marginal context by clarifying quantity means seats/licenses, but this is largely redundant with the schema's own description which also says 'number of seats/licenses'. Description provides minimal added value 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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Change the quantity (number of seats/licenses) for a subscription'), clearly stating what it modifies and noting it affects billing. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like _list and _get operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no exclusions, and no direction on when NOT to use it. The only context is a generic note that it 'may affect billing'.

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