取消订阅

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses side effects beyond the schema: releasing buffers and automatically stopping unused performance sampling and screen streaming. However, it omits permissions, idempotency, error behavior, and whether the subscription ID must be active.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a relevant side-effect note. No wasted wording, and the essential behavior is conveyed immediately.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers the core action and key side effects. It is not fully complete because it lacks usage context and parameter semantics, but it does enough to support correct invocation.

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%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented subscriptionId parameter. It does not explain the parameter's format, source, or meaning beyond the implicit association with '订阅'; the schema only declares it as a required string.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: '结束订阅并释放缓冲' clearly identifies the tool as ending a subscription and releasing its buffer. It contrasts implicitly with the sibling events_subscribe, but does not explicitly name alternatives or distinguish itself from other event-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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as events_subscribe or events_read. Usage is only implied by the phrase '结束订阅', leaving the agent to infer the correct context without any when-not conditions.

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