Stop watching domains
unwatch_domainsRemove one or more domains from your snooze watchlist. Requires signing in to your snooze account.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domains | Yes | Domain names to stop watching |
unwatch_domainsRemove one or more domains from your snooze watchlist. Requires signing in to your snooze account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domains | Yes | Domain names to stop watching |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate idempotent and destructive behavior; description adds the key requirement of authentication, which is not in annotations.
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 efficiently cover purpose and a critical requirement, with no extraneous information.
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 simple single-parameter tool and no output schema, the description covers the core action and a key prerequisite; could briefly mention if domains must be currently watched.
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%, and the description restates the parameter's purpose ('Domain names to stop watching') without adding significant new meaning 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 specific verb 'remove' and resource 'domains from your snooze watchlist', clearly distinguishing it from sibling 'watch_domains' (add) and others.
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?
Provides a clear prerequisite ('requires signing in') and implies use case (removing watched domains) though no explicit exclusion of alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: checking domain status, brand name safety, listing watches, adding to watchlist, and removing from watchlist. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_domains, list_watches, watch_domains), making them predictable and easy for an agent to understand.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for domain monitoring and watchlist management. Each tool serves a necessary function without excess or deficiency.
The tool set covers the core lifecycle: checking domains, performing a safety check, adding/removing watches, and listing the watchlist. No obvious gaps for its intended domain monitoring purpose.