Unpin note

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

The only annotation is openWorldHint:true, which does not describe read/write safety, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action but omits side effects, idempotency, return behavior, or errors if the note is not pinned.

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 wasted words, but it is terse to the point of under-specification. Title and description overlap heavily, adding little unique information.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is insufficient for a state-changing tool. It does not explain what unpinning entails, how the system responds, or what happens when the note is not pinned.

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%, and the description adds no parameter-level detail. It only echoes 'note' and 'entity' without explaining entity_type values or how entity_id and note_id relate.

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 a specific action ('Unpin') and resource ('a note on an entity'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from kommo_notes_pin, but the verb alone distinguishes it from sibling tools.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kommo_notes_pin, nor does it mention prerequisites such as the note needing to be pinned. No contextual or exclusionary guidance is provided.

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