unbookmark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full safety burden. The word 'Remove' indicates a mutation, but the description does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions, or behavior when the tweet is not bookmarked. This leaves a significant gap for a write operation.

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 a single concise sentence, immediately front-loading the action and resource. No unnecessary words.

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 tool is simple with one parameter, but the description lacks details about return values, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., the tweet must be currently bookmarked). With no output schema and no annotations, it is minimally complete but leaves gaps.

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 schema only defines tweet_id as a required string with no description (0% coverage). The description adds 'by id', which confirms tweet_id is the tweet identifier, but does not specify format or constraints. It adds minimal value beyond the parameter name.

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 the specific verb 'Remove' with the resource 'a tweet from bookmarks' and the method 'by id'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like bookmark (which adds) and delete_tweet (which deletes the tweet itself).

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 alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. The usage is implied: use when you want to unbookmark a tweet, and it requires the tweet_id. However, there is no guidance on when not to use it or comparison to similar tools, so it's at a minimum viable level.

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