remove_subscriber

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so destructive behavior is covered. The description adds value by specifying 'entirely' and contrasting with the status-based unsubscription, clarifying the irreversible nature of removal. It does not contradict annotations and provides context beyond the structured data.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the primary action and then provide the alternative. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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 mutation tool with two fully described parameters and destructiveHint annotation, the description sufficiently covers the decision-making context. It explains the core behavior and the alternative path, and no output schema exists to explain. The only minor gap is lack of explicit statement about permanent deletion, but destructiveHint and 'entirely' imply it adequately.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (address and permalink) already documented with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter information, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 action: 'Remove a subscriber from a broadcast stream entirely.' It names the specific resource (broadcast stream) and the entity (subscriber), and contrasts with the sibling add_subscriber by noting the alternative for unsubscribing. This unambiguously distinguishes the tool from its siblings.

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 second sentence explicitly provides when-not-to-use guidance: 'To stop mailing someone while keeping the record, set their status to unsubscribed with add_subscriber instead.' It names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it, leaving no ambiguity about when to choose removal versus unsubscription.

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