unglue_website

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that a website is removed from a collection, but does not clarify whether removal is reversible, whether the website is deleted from the system or merely unlinked, or whether special permissions are required. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. For a two-parameter tool with a simple operation, this is appropriately concise and structured.

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 schema fully documents both required parameters, and the operation is simple. However, the description omits behavioral context such as side effects, reversibility, and how this relates to sibling tools clusion. It is the minimum viable amount of information for an agent to understand the operation, but not much more.

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 are already documented. The description adds only a light mapping of glublerId to 'specific Glubler collection' and url to 'website domain/URL', but no extra formatting, constraints, or relationship details 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 uses a specific action verb ('Remove'), names the object ('a website'), and scopes it to a Glubler collection. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tools like glue_website or delete_glubler, but the operation is clearly distinguishable by its inverse relationship to glue_website.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus glue_website, glue_websites_batch, or delete_glubler. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative recommendations are provided, so usage must be inferred entirely from the action verb and tool name.

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