tealfabric_unpublish_webapp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about reversibility, whether the public URL stops resolving, idempotency, or what error occurs if the webapp is already offline. "Take it offline" hints at effect but doesn't confirm it, which is thin for a state-changing operation.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the parenthetical clarification placed where it reads naturally. Nothing extraneous.

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 one-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to call it correctly. But with zero annotations on a mutation, it should say more about the resulting state and failure modes.

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?

There is a single parameter (webapp_id) with 100% schema description coverage ("Webapp UUID"), so the schema already does the work. The description adds nothing about the identifier beyond what is in the schema, matching the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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 (unpublish) and resource (Tealfabric webapp), plus a clarifying gloss ("take it offline") that removes ambiguity about what unpublishing means. It's distinguishable from sibling tealfabric_delete_webapp by implication, but the description never explicitly contrasts the two.

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's inverse relationship to tealfabric_publish_webapp; there is no explicit statement of when to choose unpublish over delete or update. No prerequisites, no note about whether the app must currently be published.

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