unsubscribe_houdini_events

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing effects. It discloses the key 'clear all subscriptions' behavior and the cancellation action, but does not mention reversibility, permissions, or error cases. Since this is a mutation tool, additional detail on side effects would be expected, but the main behavior is covered.

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 with two clear clauses. It front-loads the main action and adds the important conditional behavior without any waste. Perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core action and the special omission case. However, it lacks details on 'ctx' and the accepted format of 'types', which are necessary for correct invocation. The overall picture is adequate but with noticeable gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only implies that 'types' is optional and omitting it clears all subscriptions, but does not explain what 'types' contains or what 'ctx' represents. This leaves significant ambiguity for the 2-parameter tool.

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 clearly states the tool's function: canceling event subscriptions, with a specific resource ('指定事件' specified events) and an explicit behavior when types is omitted. It distinguishes from the sibling 'subscribe_houdini_events' by directly indicating the opposite action.

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 provides a clear usage context: omitting 'types' clears all subscriptions, which guides on how to use the tool for different scenarios. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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