Unpublish (disable) a paid x402 route

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

Even though annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the gateway listing stops serving, the operation is reversible via update_x402_route, and an Apiosk provider token is required. These details go beyond the annotations and help the agent understand consequences and prerequisites.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the core action and effect, then add the reversal path and auth requirement. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or unnecessary repetition.

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?

For a simple one-parameter disabling operation with an output schema and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description covers the essential context: what happens, how to reverse it, and what credential is required. Nothing critical is missing.

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%, and route_id is a bare string with no schema description. The tool description does not explicitly state that route_id is the identifier of the route to disable, nor how to obtain it or what format it takes. The name and the phrase 'a paid x402 route' imply some semantics, but the description fails to compensate for the total absence of parameter documentation.

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 the specific verb 'Disable' and the exact resource, 'a paid x402 route,' and further clarifies the operational effect: 'its gateway listing stops serving.' This clearly distinguishes it from publish_x402_route and update_x402_route while naming the relevant reversal sibling.

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 states when to use the tool: to disable a paid x402 route. It also names the alternative for reversing the action: update_x402_route {status: 'active'}. It stops short of explicitly giving 'when not to use' guidance, but the context is strong enough to guide an agent.

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