transkribus_elearning_unsubscribeCancel an e-learning course subscription for a specific collection using its collection ID. This removes the course enrollment linked to that collection.
Unsubscribe from an e-learning course for a collection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| collId | Yes | Collection ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as what exactly happens upon unsubscription or any side effects. It is not contradictory, but the minimal description does not enhance transparency.
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 sentence that precisely conveys the tool's function with no unnecessary words or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded.
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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but lacks details like required permissions or reversibility. The annotations partially compensate, but the description could provide more context.
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 provides full coverage (100%) with a clear description for the sole parameter 'collId'. The tool description adds no additional semantic information beyond what the schema already offers.
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 action (unsubscribe) and resource (e-learning course for a collection). It effectively distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like transkribus_elearning_subscribe and transkribus_elearning_list.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., being subscribed first) or contrast with related tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.