unwatch_hipocampo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool deletes a webhook and returns a confirmation, but it does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether any related data is affected, or any error behavior. As a destructive operation, this lack of context is a notable gap.

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 compact, with a single sentence for the main action and short 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no redundant information. Every element serves a functional role.

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 tool with one parameter and a simple delete action, the description covers the essential operation and the parameter's meaning. However, it omits usage context, such as prerequisites or error handling, and does not mention where the ID comes from. Given the lack of annotations and the presence of an output schema, a bit more context would be expected, but the simplicity of the tool mitigates the gap.

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, 'id', is explained as 'ID del watch a eliminar' in the description, which adds meaning beyond the bare integer in the schema. However, it does not specify how to obtain this ID (e.g., via list_watches) or any validation rules. The description compensates for the 0% schema coverage but stays minimal.

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 begins with 'Elimina un webhook registrado por su ID', which clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (a registered webhook/watch). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like watch_hipocampo and list_watches, which perform create and list operations. The tool name aligns with the description, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that the ID can be obtained from list_watches, nor does it contrast with other deletion tools like delete_hipocampo. The usage context is only implied from the tool name and purpose.

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