unsubscribeCancel a subscription by id. Ownership is enforced — you can only cancel your own subscriptions. The row is deactivated (not deleted) so its historical events stay available via recent_alerts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Subscription id (uuid) returned by subscribe. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description reveals that the row is deactivated (not deleted) and historical events remain, adding value beyond annotations. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).
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?
Three concise sentences with no wasted words, front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds necessary 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?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers mutation behavior, ownership, and side effects sufficiently.
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 adds that the id is returned by subscribe, providing helpful context beyond the schema's description.
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 'Cancel a subscription by id', using specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like subscribe and list_subscriptions.
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?
Ownership enforcement is explicitly stated ('you can only cancel your own subscriptions'), providing clear context for when to use. No alternative tool is named, but the guidance is sufficient.
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.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple ask_pipeworx variants and several prediction market tools. This causes ambiguity for agents trying to select the right tool.
Tool names mix verb_noun patterns (ask_pipeworx, forget) with noun phrases (entity_profile) and inconsistent prefixes (pipeworx_, polymarket_). No consistent naming convention.
With 32 tools, the set is excessive for a server named 'Buzzword Density' and includes many redundant or overlapping tools. A more focused set of 10-15 would be more coherent.
The tool set covers a wide range of data sources and operations (retrieval, comparison, monitoring, memory), missing only minor lifecycle operations like updating stored data.