undo_retweet

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the basic action. It does not disclose idempotency, required state (e.g., must already be retweeted), failure behavior, or return values, leaving the agent without crucial behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose with no redundancy.

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 the simple tool, the description is adequate for basic understanding but lacks behavioral and usage details that an agent needs for correct invocation, such as error cases and side effects. The absence of annotations and output schema increases the need for more descriptive context.

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 only parameter, tweet_id, is mentioned in the description ('by tweet id'), but the description does not add detail about the expected format or source. With 0% schema coverage, this minimal clarification helps but is not substantial.

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 'Undo a retweet by tweet id' clearly states the action (undo) and resource (retweet), and specifies the input identifier. It is distinct from sibling tools like retweet and delete_tweet, as it specifically targets retweets.

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 usage guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The context is implied by the name and action, but the description does not say when to use this versus other tools, nor does it provide prerequisites or exclusions.

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