hello_aigent_unsubscribe

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

The description discloses idempotency and safety of double invocation, which is useful behavioral context. However, without any annotations, the burden is higher; it lacks details on error handling (e.g., if subscription_id is invalid) or side effects beyond consent revocation.

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 concise, using two short sentences that immediately convey purpose and a key behavioral trait. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no output schema and a single parameter, the description covers the main purpose and a behavioral guarantee. However, it does not describe the return value or potential error conditions, leaving the agent to infer or handle unknowns.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter, and its description 'The subscription to revoke' is adequate. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, 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 uses a specific verb 'Unsubscribe (revoke consent)' and clearly identifies the resource as 'subscription'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'subscribe' by being the inverse operation, and the idempotency note adds clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'hello_aigent_subscribe' or 'hello_aigent_fetch'). The agent receives no context about prerequisites or scenarios where this should or should not be used.

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