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?
The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond the annotations: ownership enforcement, row deactivation instead of deletion, and the impact on recent_alerts. These specifics clarify the tool's behavior in a way that annotations alone do not fully convey.
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, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence serves a purpose (action, ownership, side effects). No redundancy or filler.
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 one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, ownership, and side-effect on historical events. However, it does not mention the return value or error cases (e.g., invalid id or unauthorized attempt), which would be useful given the absence of an output schema. Overall, it is nearly complete for the tool's simplicity.
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%, with the parameter fully described as the subscription id returned by subscribe. The description only says 'by id', adding no extra semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 a specific verb (Cancel) and resource (a subscription by id), clearly naming the action. It also distinguishes from siblings by noting ownership enforcement and the deactivate-not-delete behavior, making it unique among subscription-related tools.
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 implies when to use the tool (to cancel a subscription you own) and provides contextual cross-reference to recent_alerts for historical availability. It does not explicitly name alternatives like list_subscriptions or when not to use, but the ownership constraint and deactivation note give clear practical guidance.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes, such as ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research. While each has distinct nuances, they could be confused by an agent.
Most tools use snake_case, but the naming pattern is inconsistent (e.g., bet_research vs. polymarket_arbitrage vs. ai_visibility_check). There is no strong verb_noun pattern across the set.
34 tools is high given the server's stated purpose ('spacenews'). Only a few tools directly relate to space news; the bulk are general-purpose Pipeworx utilities, making the scope too broad.
For a space news server, the tool surface is incomplete: only get_articles, get_blogs, and search_articles are relevant. Missing tools for article details, source filtering, or categories. The extensive general tools don't make up for this gap.