unsubscribe_events

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the operation. It is silent on whether removing a subscription is idempotent, what happens to in-flight events, whether errors are returned for non-subscribed types, and whether scope is session- or globally-bound.

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 economical sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. It is well-formed but too thin to earn a 5 for structure given the disclosure gaps elsewhere.

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, but for a state-mutating streaming control tool with zero annotations and zero schema documentation, the description leaves the agent without the preconditions and effects needed to call it confidently.

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% for the single required parameter, so the description must compensate and largely does not. 'Specified event types' loosely maps to event_types, but it omits format expectations, whether the list must match prior subscriptions, and whether an empty list unsubscribes from everything.

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 gives a specific verb ('Unsubscribe') and resource ('real-time event streaming'), making the inverse of subscribe_events immediately legible. It does not explicitly name or distinguish itself from the sibling subscribe_events or poll_events tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite guidance. The description never states whether this must be preceded by subscribe_events, whether it stops all streaming or only the listed types, or how it relates to poll_events as an alternative.

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