Unsubscribe from ticker alerts

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

Annotations already convey destructive and idempotent hints. The description adds context by stating 'Soft-disable', specifying the return value for already inactive alerts, and the unknown_ticker error. This goes beyond annotations by detailing exact behavior.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: first defines action and idempotency, second covers error case.

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 presence of an output schema (implied by the context signal) and strong annotations, the description covers key behaviors. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating the success return value beyond the idempotent case, but overall it is comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100% with a parameter description 'Ticker to unsubscribe from.' The description does not add meaningful additional semantics beyond restating 'for the given ticker'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Soft-disable' and the resource 'the caller's news-alert subscription for the given ticker'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like alphai_alerts_subscribe by specifying the opposite action, and explains idempotency and error behavior.

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 when to use (to stop alerts for a ticker) and provides guidance on idempotency and error handling. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear given the tool name and title.

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