Unwatch Creator

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds useful context: 'Nothing is fetched, so there is no cost.' This goes beyond the schema and annotations by clarifying the operation is local and free, which is valuable for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 first sentence is efficient, but 'Nothing is fetched, so there is no cost' and 'No cost to call' are redundant. The duplication is unnecessary and slightly hurts the conciseness score.

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 mutation with two well-documented parameters and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description is complete enough. It lacks a return-value explanation, but no output schema exists and the operation is straightforwardly a destructive removal.

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 100%, so both parameters (platform and username) are already documented. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond reaffirming 'creator' maps to the username field, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a creator from your watchlist.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like watch_creator and catch_up_watchlist, which are about adding or viewing.

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 context is clear: use this when the goal is to remove a creator from the watchlist. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intent is unambiguous and does not conflict with sibling tool purposes.

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