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 adds behavioral context beyond annotations: deactivation (not deletion), ownership enforcement, and historical availability. No contradictions with 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 concise sentences with no wasted words, front-loading the primary action.
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 usage constraints and side effects sufficiently. Could mention return value but not necessary.
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 covers 100% of parameters; description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter 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 uses specific verb 'cancel' and resource 'subscription by id', clearly distinguishing 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 stated ('you can only cancel your own subscriptions'), providing context for when this tool is appropriate. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is given.
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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., NPS park tools vs. Pipeworx queries vs. Polymarket analysis). Some overlap exists between ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_grounded, and among the many Polymarket tools, but descriptions help differentiate them.
Naming conventions vary: some use verb_noun (list_parks), others use descriptive phrases (ask_pipeworx_grounded, scan_competitor_ai_presence). While all use snake_case, there is no consistent pattern in prefixes or verb choice.
35 tools is too many for a coherent server. The set appears to bundle multiple unrelated domains (NPS, Pipeworx, Polymarket, memory, subscriptions) into a single server, lacking focused scope.
Each domain has notable gaps (e.g., NPS lacks real-time conditions; Pipeworx lacks data ingestion tools; Polymarket lacks order placement). Some sub-areas (memory, subscriptions) are complete, but overall the surface is incomplete for the broad range of domains.