calendar_feed_disable

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower; the description adds real value by disclosing the blast radius ('every link stops working', calendars stop updating) and the return payload. It stops short of saying whether the change is reversible via calendar_feed_enable or what permissions are needed.

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?

Two short sentences, effect stated first and return value second, with no filler.

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 zero-parameter toggle with a known return shape and full annotation coverage, the definition covers what happens and what comes back. Only the reversibility/permission story is left implicit, which is a minor gap given calendar_feed_enable is a visible sibling.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline applies and no misleading parameter talk is present.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Turn off the calendar subscription') and immediately describes the concrete effect on links and subscribed calendars, which distinguishes it unambiguously from calendar_feed_enable, calendar_feed_update, and calendar_feed_get.

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?

Usage is only implied by the name and effect; the description never states when to prefer this over calendar_feed_enable/update or what precondition (an enabled feed) is required. An agent can infer the route, but nothing is spelled out.

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