remove_watched_source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action and directs the user to find the ID, but does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or any operational caveats. For a simple removal tool this is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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 two short sentences with the primary action front-loaded. Every word adds value—the first sentence states the purpose, the second provides a necessary prerequisite—without any redundancy.

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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the action and how to obtain the required input. It does not describe the return value or postconditions, but these are less critical for a simple removal operation.

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 schema already provides a description for the single parameter 'id', achieving 100% coverage. The description adds value by specifying that the ID comes from list_watched_sources, clarifying the expected source and format beyond the schema.

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 'Stop watching a source' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_watched_source and list_watched_sources by focusing on 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 instruction to 'Use list_watched_sources to find the source ID' provides a clear prerequisite for usage. It implies this tool is for stopping watch operations, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives beyond finding the ID, so it falls short of a 5.

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