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

Annotation readOnlyHint:true directly contradicts the description's 'Unpublish' action, which is a state-changing operation. The description does not reconcile this contradiction and the annotation undercuts trust. The extra note about allowance is irrelevant given the inconsistency.

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 sentences with zero redundancy; the core action is front-loaded, and the note about allowance is a distinct useful trait. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

While the output schema exists and the parameter is documented, the contradiction between description and annotations leaves serious ambiguity about whether the tool mutates state. The description also doesn't address prerequisites like the generation being currently public, beyond an implicit phrase. Incomplete due to the unresolved behavioral conflict.

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 coverage is 100% for the single clipId parameter, and the schema description already explains its role. The tool description adds context about the parameter's purpose ('previously made public') but no additional syntax or constraints 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 verb 'Unpublish' and the resource 'library generation', with the scope 'you previously made public'. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling publish_generation, making the agent able to select it correctly.

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 phrase 'you previously made public' gives clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternate tools or state when not to use it, though the context is enough for an informed agent.

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