zhiqi_unsubscribe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds useful auth and channel constraints (userToken requirement, channel A), but it does not disclose side effects beyond the obvious 'unsubscribe', nor does it cover idempotency, reversibility, or failure behavior.

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 parenthetical sentence with the action front-loaded; every clause adds information (target action, channel restriction, prerequisite). There is no redundancy or filler.

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 no output schema, the description covers the core action and prerequisite reasonably well. Still, it leaves postId sourcing and expected success/error behavior unspecified, making it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 0% and the description never mentions 'postId' or where to obtain it. The word '帖子' provides a weak semantic bridge to infer that postId identifies the post, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 and resource ('取消订阅帖子' – unsubscribe from a post), making the action unambiguous. It also scopes the operation to human-login channel A, which helps distinguish it from general subscription-related siblings like zhiqi_subscribe and zhiqi_subscriptions.

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 gives an operational precondition: only human-login channel A and a locally configured userToken are allowed. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to choose this over related siblings, so the usage context is only implied rather than fully spelled out.

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