cigchat_subscriber_opt_out_sms

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

The description discloses the HTTP method (DELETE) and a required scope, providing some behavioral context beyond the tool name. However, it doesn't mention side effects, reversibility, or what the opt-out action entails, which is important given no annotations exist.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main action. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though the bracketed HTTP method is a slightly technical inclusion that could be cleaner.

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 mutation tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits the meaning of user_ns and any details about the effect or result of the opt-out, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description provides no explanation of 'user_ns'. The parameter name is ambiguous and the tool description doesn't compensate, leaving the agent without guidance on what value to supply.

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 states the action ('Opt-out SMS') clearly with a resource and distinguishes from sibling tools like cigchat_subscriber_opt_in_sms and opt_out_email. However, it doesn't explicitly say it's for a subscriber, relying on the tool name for that context.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only additional note is an auth requirement (Manage Flow scope), which is a permission prerequisite rather than a usage guideline.

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