Unpublish JobZyn job

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

Annotations already signal write/destructive behavior, so the description adds value by clarifying the exact effect: 'Removes public visibility while retaining the job data' and 'Does not permanently delete the job.' It also includes 'write scope' and the HTTP method, giving the agent a clearer behavioral picture.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first states the operation and endpoint, the second describes the state change, and the third clarifies what it does not do. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 one-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage and annotations covering idempotency, read-only-ness, and destructiveness, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. It clarifies the non-destructive nature of unpublishing and does not need an output schema to explain return values.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema with a clear description of externalJobId, including the warning that it is not the internal numeric JobZyn job ID. The description's 'external ID' phrasing adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb and resource ('Unpublish a job by external ID') and gives the exact endpoint and scope. It is clearly distinct from the sibling tools (create, update, get, link), and it disambiguates 'unpublish' from permanent deletion.

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: use this when you need to remove public visibility while retaining data, and it explicitly says this does not permanently delete the job. It does not name alternative tools or state when to prefer update_job instead, but the intended usage is evident.

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