Unlink a streaming service from your Trakt account by supplying its service ID (e.g., netflix) to remove the connection.
Unlink a streaming service.
DELETE /younify/users/services/{service_id}
Args:
service_id: The streaming service id (e.g. netflix).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| service_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds no consequences, reversibility information, or authentication expectations, and 'Unlink' restates the purpose without going beyond what structured metadata provides.
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 compact and front-loaded: a one-line purpose, the HTTP method/path, and the parameter example. There is no filler, and the call envelope is immediately scannable.
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 single-parameter delete with annotations and an output schema, this is nearly sufficient for making the call. It is missing usage alternatives and any explicit side-effect statement, so it is adequate but not complete.
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%, but the description compensates by explaining that service_id is a streaming service id and giving the concrete example 'netflix'. This is enough for an agent to know the expected value format.
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 first sentence 'Unlink a streaming service' states a specific verb and resource, and the DELETE endpoint reinforces the action. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like create_younify_connect or create_younify_users_refresh_by_service_id.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_younify_connect or create_younify_users_refresh_by_service_id. The agent must infer usage from the name and endpoint alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.