unsubscribe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing a key behavioral trait: 'Costs 50 quota units,' which is critical for usage planning. It also clarifies the action as deletion, but doesn't mention side effects like irreversible removal or confirmation steps.

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 highly concise and well-structured: a brief purpose statement with cost info, followed by a clear parameter explanation. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, and it's front-loaded with essential information.

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 complexity (destructive action, quota cost) and no annotations, the description is fairly complete: it covers purpose, cost, and parameter semantics. With an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, but it could benefit from more on error conditions or success indicators.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful context for the single parameter by explaining that subscription_id comes 'from list_subscriptions,' which clarifies its source and usage. However, it doesn't detail format constraints or validation rules.

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 clearly states the verb ('unsubscribe/delete') and resource ('subscription'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'subscribe' by indicating deletion rather than creation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools (e.g., 'delete_playlist'), though the resource specificity helps.

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 implies usage context by referencing 'list_subscriptions' as the source for subscription_id, suggesting this tool should be used after listing subscriptions. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives or any prerequisites beyond having a subscription ID.

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