gitee_unwatch_repo

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states the action without mentioning side effects (e.g., does it require authentication? Is it reversible? Does it affect notifications?). This is insufficient for an agent to understand the impact.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. While it is concise, it is not structured with front-loaded key information or additional context. It is adequate but could be improved with explicit scope or usage notes.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no output schema, no nested objects), the description is minimally complete. It conveys the primary action, but lacks context about prerequisites, effects, or return values. For a basic mutation tool, it is functional but not thorough.

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?

Both parameters ('owner' and 'repo') are described in the input schema with clear descriptions ('Repository owner', 'Repository path name'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 'Unwatch a repository' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from siblings like 'gitee_watch_repo' (the reverse operation) and 'gitee_check_watching' (query). However, it does not elaborate on what unwatching entails (e.g., stopping notifications), which could add clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like 'gitee_watch_repo' and 'gitee_check_watching' exist, but the description gives no context for choosing one over the other. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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