unschedule_draftCancels a scheduled publication date for a podcast draft so it no longer auto-publishes. Use it to remove or reset a draft's scheduled release before it goes live.
Unschedule a previously scheduled draft.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| draft_id | Yes | target draft identifier. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does 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 identifies the operation as an unschedule mutation and implies a precondition, but says nothing about permissions, reversibility, error behavior if the draft is not scheduled, or what state the draft returns to.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool, though its brevity leaves important behavioral details unstated.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a simple mutation tool with one well-documented parameter, the description is minimally adequate, but it omits behavioral context about post-conditions and failure modes that would matter when unscheduling a draft.
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 100% description coverage and documents the single draft_id parameter. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 a specific verb and resource ('Unschedule ... draft') and adds the precondition that the draft was previously scheduled. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling schedule_draft beyond the antonym in the verb.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as schedule_draft or put_draft. The phrase 'previously scheduled' implies a precondition, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use rules are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.