unregister

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful detail that only one session is ended and that the effect is board removal, but says nothing about consequences for in-flight messages or whether the session name can be reused.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and the effect appended parenthetically. Nothing is wasted and nothing is buried.

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 one-parameter tool with rich annotations and fully documented schema, the description is essentially complete; it explains the action's effect and scope. It only lacks detail on downstream consequences, which is a minor gap given the annotation coverage.

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% and the sole parameter is documented in the schema as the session name returned by register. The description adds no further semantics, so the baseline 3 applies - the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

States a specific verb ('End') and resource ('one of your sessions'), and the parenthetical clarifies the concrete effect: removal from the board. It distinguishes itself from the 'register' sibling by being its inverse, though it never names that counterpart explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the register/unregister pairing and by 'your sessions', but there is no explicit statement of when to call this versus simply letting a session lapse, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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