un_watch_drp_alert

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only labels the operation as a 'mutation' but does not explain what un-watching does, whether it is reversible, permission requirements, or side effects. No informational value is added.

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 extremely brief (one line), but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It lacks essential information and does not adequately serve the agent.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's core purpose or provide any behavioral context, leaving the agent without sufficient information to select and invoke it correctly.

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% (both parameters have descriptions), so a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds only 'Variables: shortCode' and an example, which does not enrich the semantics of shortCode or customer_slug 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 restates the tool name and GraphQL mutation ('unWatchDRPAlert') without explicitly stating the action ('unwatch a DRP alert'). It provides no verb+resource clarity beyond what the name already implies, making it a near-tautology.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as un_watch_drp_alerts (plural) or watch_drp_alert. There is no context, prerequisite, or exclusion information.

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