Remove a like

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the operation's safety profile. The description adds context about how the like record is discovered from the post's viewer state, which is useful beyond annotations and clarifies the input requirement.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently explains why only the post is needed, eliminating potential confusion about a like parameter.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description combined with annotations covers the essential context for a correct call. It lacks explicit failure-mode disclosure, but the idempotentHint mitigates that need.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented there. The description adds a useful hint that only the post URI is needed, reinforcing the minimal input, but does not go beyond the schema's parameter meanings.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'remove your like from a post.' It clearly states the action and clarifies that only the post URI is needed, not the like record itself. This uniquely identifies the tool's purpose and differentiates it from like_post.

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 implies when to use this tool (when you want to remove a like) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling like_post is present but not referenced, leaving the choice an agent must infer.

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