seerr_delete_user_push_subscription

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

The description adds 'DESTRUCTIVE' but this merely echoes the destructiveHint annotation. It doesn't disclose additional traits like irreversibility, effect on user's push notifications, or whether the operation is idempotent.

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?

Extremely concise, with the main action front-loaded. However, the second sentence 'DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data' is redundant with annotations and adds little 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 is minimal, lacking context about what a push subscription is, the role of endpoint, and any side effects. Given the destructive nature and the need for user_id and endpoint, more explanation is needed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the parameters, but it only says 'by key,' leaving user_id and endpoint ambiguous. It doesn't clarify that endpoint is likely the unique subscription key.

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 action ('Delete user push subscription') and hints at the identifier ('by key'). It stands apart from sibling tools like register/list/get, which cover other lifecycle operations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the sibling list implies it complements register/list/get, the description doesn't mention when deletion is appropriate or any preconditions.

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