untag_users

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

The description merely restates the operation without adding behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnly=false, idempotent=false, and destructive=false, but the description fails to explain rate limits, reversibility, or side effects. No contradiction with annotations exists, but the added transparency value is minimal.

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 a single short sentence with no filler or repetition. The verb is placed at the start, making the core action immediately visible.

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?

Even though an output schema exists and the parameters are simple, the description is too sparse. It does not mention error conditions, what happens when a tag doesn't exist, or how this relates to the broader tagging workflow. An agent would need to infer too much from the tool name alone.

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 0% with no descriptions, so the description must compensate. It does not explain how tag_id and openid_list interact or what openid format is expected, relying entirely on parameter names. This is insufficient for an agent to correctly construct arguments beyond guessing.

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 uses a clear verb ('批量取消' = batch remove) and resource ('用户标签' = user tags), which conveys a batch untagging operation. It clearly differentiates from the sibling tag_users tool by being the inverse action, though it doesn't explicitly name that 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tag_users or list_tags. No context is provided about ordering, prerequisites, or cases where untagging is appropriate.

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