openclaw-control-mcp

openclaw_sessions_unsubscribe

Stop receiving session lifecycle events by unsubscribing. Optionally specify an OpenClaw instance to route the call.

Instructions

Unsubscribe from session lifecycle events. Wraps sessions.unsubscribe.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "openclaw_sessions_unsubscribe"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`instance`	No	Optional OpenClaw instance to route this call to (e.g. 'default', 'work'). Falls back to the active default instance, or the OPENCLAW_GATEWAY_URL/TOKEN env vars when set. List configured instances with openclaw_setup_list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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 'unsubscribe', implying a mutating action, but does not describe side effects, reversibility, permission needs, or the scope of lifecycle events affected. The note about wrapping a lower-level function is helpful but insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two sentences, no wasted words. However, it lacks structure (e.g., separate sections for usage, output) but remains clear for a simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional param, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose. However, in the context of many session-related sibling tools, additional context like the event types or link to subscription management would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%; the single parameter 'instance' is fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool 'unsubscribes from session lifecycle events', providing a specific verb and resource. It also references the underlying 'sessions.unsubscribe' method. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the similar 'openclaw_sessions_messages_unsubscribe', though the tool name and context imply the difference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 like 'openclaw_sessions_subscribe' or 'openclaw_sessions_messages_unsubscribe'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions for unsubscription.

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

Deploy Server