users_bulk_revoke_subscription

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Revoke' implies a mutation, but the description does not say what revocation entails, whether it is reversible, whether it requires special permissions, or what happens if some provided user IDs don't exist. For a mutation tool with no annotations, this level of disclosure is a significant gap.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler: 'Bulk revoke subscriptions for selected users'. Every word contributes to the purpose, making it easy to scan and process.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description leaves too much unspecified: what a revoked state means, whether the operation is atomic, how invalid userIds are handled, there is no clear success/partial-failure response. The single well-described parameter cannot fully compensate for this missing operational context.

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% and the single param userIds is fully documented as 'Array of user numeric IDs', which sets the baseline at 3. The description's 'for selected users' only loosely maps to that parameter and adds essentially no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 explicitly states the action and resource — 'revoke subscriptions' — and adds 'for selected users', which clarifies that this tool targets a defined set of user IDs rather than all users. This helps distinguish it from sibling bulk_all tools, though it does not explicitly contrast it with the single-user users_revoke_subscription.

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?

Usage context is implied: 'Bulk revoke ... for selected users' suggests this is the tool to call when revoking subscriptions for a specified list of users. However, it gives no explicit 'use this vs that' guidance, and the agent is left to infer that users_revoke_subscription is the single-user alternative and that bulk_all tools should be used for all users.

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