gmail_watch_stop

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

The description is minimal and does not disclose important behavioral traits beyond the obvious cancellation. There is no mention of side effects, required permissions, or what happens to existing watches, especially given the absence of annotations.

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 is front-loaded with the essential action and resource, with no wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter and at least one sibling (gmail_watch_start), the description is too sparse. It does not explain the result of the action, success criteria, or error scenarios, making it incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 parameter 'user_id' is not described in the description, and the schema coverage is 0%. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter name, which is insufficient for an agent to understand its role.

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 verb 'Cancel' and the resource 'Gmail push-notification watch', which is specific and distinguishes it from its sibling gmail_watch_start.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It is implied that it should be used after starting a watch, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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