unpublish_story

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Unpublish') which implies a mutation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: no mention of permissions required, whether the action is reversible, what happens to the story's status, rate limits, or error conditions. The optional 'lang' parameter hints at localization but isn't explained.

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 - just two brief sentences that get straight to the point. Every word serves a purpose: the first sentence states the core functionality, the second mentions an optional parameter. There's no fluff or unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters (one required), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'unpublishing' entails operationally, what the expected outcome is, error scenarios, or the effect of the optional 'lang' parameter. The agent would need to guess about important behavioral aspects of this destructive operation.

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 but adds minimal value. It mentions 'Optional lang' which corresponds to one parameter, but doesn't explain what 'lang' represents (language code? locale?) or its effect. The required 'story_id' parameter gets no mention at all. With 2 parameters and 0% schema coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 ('Unpublish') and resource ('a story'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_story' or 'restore_story_version' by focusing on unpublishing rather than deletion or restoration. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'publish_story' beyond the obvious inverse relationship.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., story must be published first), consequences (e.g., what happens to published content), or when to choose 'unpublish_story' over 'delete_story' or other story-related operations. The single sentence offers only basic functionality without context.

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