expire_push_subscription

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the key side effect: subsequent pushes return 410, and it clarifies that the tool marks rather than deletes. However, it does not address reversibility, idempotency, error cases, or whether the subscription remains visible to list_push_subscriptions.

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 entire description is one tight sentence that front-loads the action and consequence, with the rationale attached without redundancy. Every word contributes meaning.

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 low-complexity, one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and observable outcome. Minor gaps remain, such as how to source subscription_id and what the direct response is, but these are not severe for this tool's simplicity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain what subscription_id refers to, where it comes from, or its expected format. It only indirectly implies that the subscription is a Web Push subscription, leaving the parameter under-documented.

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 specific verb, 'mark', with a clearly identified resource, 'a Web Push subscription', and explains the observable consequence ('the next push answers 410'). This makes it easy to distinguish from siblings like create_push_subscription, list_push_subscriptions, and simulate_push_token_unregistered.

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 the tool: when a subscription should be treated as dead so a backend can observe a 410 and clean up. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough given the sibling tool list.

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