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. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint false) but description adds that it deactivates rather than deletes and that historical events stay available. This provides valuable behavioral context beyond 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?
The description is two sentences, with the purpose in the first sentence and constraints/side effects in the second. No redundant 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 purpose, ownership, and side effects completely.
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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter, so description adds little extra beyond restating the parameter's purpose. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 'cancel' and the resource 'subscription'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'subscribe' and 'list_subscriptions' by explicitly being the cancellation action.
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 states ownership enforcement ('you can only cancel your own subscriptions'), providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but adequately guides the agent.
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 highly distinct purpose, from Disney character lookups to financial data and prediction market analysis. Agent can easily distinguish them by name and description.
Naming conventions vary wildly: some use verb_noun (list_characters), others are phrases (ask_pipeworx) or compound nouns (polymarket_arbitrage). No consistent pattern across tools.
34 tools is far too many for a Disney-themed server. Only 3 tools (list_characters, search_characters, get_character) relate to Disney; the rest are general-purpose data tools that belong elsewhere.
For a Disney server, the tool surface is severely incomplete. Missing basic CRUD for characters, no info on movies, parks, or media. Extraneous tools do not fill these gaps.