unpin_chat_message

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false, and openWorld=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond them — notably it omits that message_id is optional and that omitting it unpins the most recently pinned message, a non-obvious behavioral trait for a mutation 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, front-loaded sentence with no waste, but here the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision. It is efficient but leaves the reader with nothing actionable beyond the name.

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?

This is a three-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and only one-third of parameters documented, so the description carries substantial burden. It supplies no permission requirements, no behavior for the optional message_id, and no mention of how it differs from the bulk-unpin sibling.

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 only 33%: chat_id is documented, but message_id and business_connection_id have no descriptions in the schema. The description names 'chat' and 'message' only in passing and clarifies neither the optionality of message_id nor the meaning of business_connection_id, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 and resource ('Unpin a message'), so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not differentiate from the closely related siblings pin_chat_message and unpin_all_chat_messages, which is the only gap.

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 indication of when to use this versus unpin_all_chat_messages or pin_chat_message, nor any note about the admin/permission prerequisites for unpinning. The agent must infer selection from the name alone.

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