get_unsubscribe_by_date

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and non-destructive, so the description need not repeat safety. However, it adds no behavioral detail about pagination, response structure, or rate limits, and the 'Python SDK parity' phrase is too vague to count as meaningful disclosure. Given the high schema coverage and no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining what the operation returns.

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 very concise at one sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified. It could use a second sentence to describe the return value, but given its brevity and the fact that the endpoint path is valuable, it earns a 4.

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 six parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to mention the purpose (reporting unsubscribed emails), the date-range filtering, or how this tool fits among siblings. Annotations cover safety but not functional context, leaving the agent to infer from the name and schema.

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 83% with parameter descriptions for date_from, date_to, limit, dry_run, and cursor_next. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but since the schema already documents formats and pagination, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 only provides the endpoint path 'GET /api/v2/blist/report/unsubscribe' and 'Python SDK parity', which essentially restates the tool name without explaining what the tool does. It does not distinguish this from sibling tools like get_unsubscribe_by_issue or other date-based report tools.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this retrieves unsubscribes by date range, nor does it reference any sibling tool or exclusion criteria. The only hint is the endpoint name, which implies a resource but not usage context.

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