events_unsubscribe

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, telling the agent this is a mutating, potentially destructive action. The description adds no behavior beyond the name: it does not say whether unsubscribing cancels an existing stream, what happens to buffered events, or whether it is idempotent. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description still offers negligible added context for a destructive tool.

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?

One short sentence with no wasted words, but it is sparse to the point of under-specification rather than tight conciseness. Front-loading is fine given how little is said.

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 destructive, single-parameter tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description omits everything an agent needs: what 'source' means, subscription preconditions, and any effect of unsubscribing. Only the safety-oriented annotations partially compensate.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter 'source' is completely undocumented. The description never explains what 'source' identifies, its format, or valid values (no enum), so an agent has no basis to supply a correct value.

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 states a specific verb (stop subscribing) and resource (viewer event stream), which is unambiguous and clearly the inverse of the sibling events_subscribe. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling or the read counterpart events_read, but an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

There is no guidance on when to unsubscribe versus when not to, no mention of the paired events_subscribe tool, and no preconditions (e.g., must be currently subscribed). Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.