Unpin a message

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

The description adds a key behavioral detail not evident from the schema alone: passing no id unpins everything in the dialog. This is an important side effect that goes beyond the annotations (openWorldHint, idempotentHint). However, it does not disclose potential permission requirements or effects, but the simple nature of the operation keeps this acceptable.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and contains no filler. It efficiently conveys the core functionality and the special behavior of unpinning all messages.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the main use cases and the optional messageId behavior. It does not mention accountId, but that is likely an optional parameter for multi-account setups and is understandable from context. Overall, sufficient for an agent to invoke 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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the optional messageId semantics (omitting it means unpin all), which is valuable. However, it does not explain 'peer' or 'accountId', though their names are somewhat self-explanatory in this API context. The partial compensation earns a mid-range score.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Unpin a specific message, or pass no id to unpin everything in the dialog.' It uses a specific verb (unpin) and resource (message), and distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'pin_message' by explicitly covering both specific and bulk unpinning.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool: to unpin a single message (by specifying messageId) or to unpin all messages (by omitting messageId). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the contrast with pin_message is obvious. It gives useful operational guidance but lacks explicit exclusions or prerequisites.

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