unsubscribe_from_show

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does an excellent job: it discloses that this is a destructive DELETE op, that it defaults to dry_run=true and returns a PLAN without committing, and that dry_run=false is required to actually commit. This makes the tool's side-effect behavior and safety model explicit.

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, dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and scope, then appends the endpoint, preview behavior, and commit flag efficiently. Every clause contributes operational value.

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?

The description covers the operation, endpoint, preview plan output, and how to commit, which is complete for a mutation tool with no output schema. The schema covers parameter validation and response_format. It could add an explicit note about the not-saved/error case, but this is not a significant gap.

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 the schema already fully documents show_id, dry_run, and response_format. The description reinforces the dry_run behavior, but it does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb ('Remove'), a specific resource ('ONE saved show from your library'), and the exact endpoint ('DELETE /me/shows'). The word 'ONE' distinguishes it from the bulk sibling tool remove_saved_shows, so an agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 description implies when to use it: when removing a single saved show and when confirmation via a preview plan is desired. It does not explicitly name an alternative for bulk removal, but the singular scope and plan-first behavior provide clear context for selection.

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