get_subscription_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get status' without indicating that the operation is read-only, what the status response contains, whether any state changes occur, or any permission requirements. Minimal disclosure.

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 without extraneous words. However, it is somewhat ambiguous ('status of event subscription destination' could be interpreted as either the status of the subscription's destination or the status of the subscription destination entity). Conciseness is acceptable but clarity suffers slightly.

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?

The tool has two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to explain what the returned status represents, what valid statuses are, or any prerequisites (e.g., existence of the subscription and destination). It leaves significant gaps for a simple getter.

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 0%. The description does not mention or explain the parameters 'subscription_name' and 'destination_id'. The input schema provides basic type info but the description adds no meaning, leaving the agent to guess their purpose or format.

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 'Get status of event subscription destination' clearly identifies the action (get) and the resource (status of event subscription destination). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'get_event_subscription', 'get_event_subscription_by_name', and 'test_event_destination'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain when to use 'get_subscription_status' instead of 'get_event_subscription' or 'test_event_destination'. No exclusions or context are provided.

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