Unfollow Trader

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

The description aligns with the destructiveHint annotation and adds that the trader is removed from the follow list. However, it does not disclose whether existing open positions are closed or left untouched, nor any other side effects, providing only marginal added context beyond the annotation.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and effect. There is no redundant or filler content.

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, destructive action with annotations and full schema coverage, the description adequately states the outcome. A minor gap is the lack of clarity on what happens to existing copy-trade positions, but this is not critical given the sibling tools dedicated to position management.

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?

The input schema provides a complete description of the 'wallet' parameter (100% coverage), and the tool description adds no additional meaning to that parameter. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 action verbs ('Stop copy-trading', 'remove') and names the resource ('a trader') and scope ('from your follow list'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like follow_trader, pause_trader, and resume_trader by indicating a permanent stop and removal.

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: when the user wants to stop copy-trading and unfollow. It doesn't explicitly contrast with pause_trader or resume_trader, but the action is self-explanatory, offering clear context without explicit exclusions.

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