security-unprotect-item-by-id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Unprotect') but fails to explain what 'unprotect' entails (e.g., removing security restrictions, potential side effects, or required permissions). This leaves critical behavioral traits like mutation impact, authentication needs, or error handling unspecified, making it inadequate for a tool with no annotation support.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core action ('Unprotect a Sitecore item by its ID'). It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., what 'unprotect' does, security implications), usage context, or return values. Given the tool's potential impact and the absence of structured support, the description should provide more comprehensive guidance to ensure safe and correct usage.

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 has 100% description coverage, with clear parameter documentation (id, passThru, database). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or contextual usage of parameters. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema handles the heavy lifting without extra value from the description.

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 ('Unprotect') and resource ('a Sitecore item by its ID'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'security-unprotect-item-by-path', which performs the same action but uses a path instead of an ID, leaving room for slight ambiguity in sibling distinction.

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, such as 'security-unprotect-item-by-path' for path-based operations or other security tools like 'security-protect-item-by-id'. It lacks context on prerequisites, permissions, or typical scenarios, offering minimal usage direction.

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