Unlike Post

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, providing safety context. The description adds the behavioral detail that the tool navigates to the post and clicks the Unlike button, which is an implementation detail but not substantive beyond what annotations suggest. It does not disclose idempotent behavior or failure modes when the post is already unliked.

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 concise, spending one sentence on purpose, one on mechanism, and then structured Args/Returns. It includes an example URL, and every sentence contributes value without waste.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential information: what it does, the input parameter, and the return structure. The output schema exists, and annotations provide safety hints, so the description is reasonably complete. The lack of usage guidance and the ctx ambiguity are minor gaps but do not undermine overall completeness for this simple mutation.

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 input schema only includes post_url, and the description explains it as an Instagram post URL with an example format. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage. However, the description also lists 'ctx' as an argument that is not present in the schema, which could cause minor confusion.

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 'Unlike a post,' a specific verb+resource that clearly states the tool's function. It further specifies 'Navigates to the post and clicks the Unlike button,' making the action unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like like_post and save_post.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as like_post or unfollow_user. The context is implied: it's for removing a like from an Instagram post. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, so the guidance is minimal.

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