unpinChatMessage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does well by mentioning the removal side effect, the permission requirements, and the 'Returns True on success' outcome. It could additionally note behavior when message_id is omitted, but that is already covered in the input schema.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence and essential permission/return details in the second. No filler or redundant wording.

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 tool with three parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It covers the action, permissions, and return value. Naming unpinAllChatMessages as the bulk alternative would make it fully complete, but nothing critical is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds useful permission context for chat_id but does not meaningfully expand on message_id or business_connection_id beyond what the schema already documents.

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 states a precise action: 'Remove a message from the list of pinned messages in a chat.' It clearly identifies the resource being acted on and distinguishes this tool from related siblings like unpinAllChatMessages and pinChatMessage.

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 gives clear context about when the tool can be used, including the administrator rights required for non-private chats. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as unpinAllChatMessages for removing all pins at once, so the when-not-to-use guidance is left implicit.

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