job_alert_unsubscribe

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint=true) and not read-only. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it states the operation is idempotent ('returns success even when the user was not subscribed or is already unsubscribed') and confirms the output ('Confirms the alert has been unsubscribed'). This gives the agent a clear safety profile beyond the binary hint.

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 and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, then clearly labeled Input and Output sections, followed by a one-line behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 single-parameter tool with annotations and an output schema, the description fully covers the input format, the output confirmation, and the idempotent behavior. No missing context is apparent for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 already describes the parameter with 100% coverage, and the description essentially repeats the same information (job search UUID or composite job ID from jobs_search/jobs_details). No new meaning is added beyond the schema, so with high schema coverage the 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Unsubscribes the authenticated user from job alerts for a specific job search.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like job_alert_subscribe, job_alert_list, and job_alert_unsubscribe_all by targeting a single job search.

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 implies usage context ('for a specific job search') and the input requirements, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'use unsubscribe_all for all alerts') or mention any exclusions. The sibling tool names provide some context, but the description itself lacks direct usage guidance.

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