remove_subscription_monitor

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Remove' indicates a likely destructive action, but it does not state permanence, permission needs, or side effects on scheduled jobs. Minimal transparency for a deletion operation.

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 six-word description is extremely short and front-loaded, but the brevity sacrifices substantive detail. It is not padded, yet under-specification makes it less useful than a slightly longer, structured description.

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?

Despite a simple one-parameter, destructive operation, the description omits restoration mechanics, output/return behavior, and cannot differentiate from disabling. The presence of sibling tools and output schema do not compensate for these missing contextual details.

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 sole parameter 'watch_id' is only defined as a required string in the schema with 0% description coverage. The description never explains what watch_id refers to, where to obtain it, or its format, leaving the agent without sufficient information to populate it.

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 uses a clear verb ('Remove') and identifies the resource ('a scheduled monitor'), aligning with the tool name. It is not as specific as 'remove subscription monitor' but sufficient to distinguish from monitor listing/running 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 provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'set_monitor_enabled' or 'run_monitor_now'. The description offers no context or exclusions, so the agent must infer intended usage.

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