unpublish_marketing_email

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal a key limitation (pending-only) and the non-effect on delivered mail. It omits side effects, such as whether the action is reversible, whether user_confirmed is required to proceed, and whether a scheduled send is canceled versus a draft removed.

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 with no filler. The action and the core constraint are front-loaded, and every line adds meaningful 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?

The purpose and timing are clear, but the tool is under-specified as a state-changing operation. The role of 'user_confirmed' is unexplained, and no guidance addresses how this relates to 'cancel_scheduled_publish'. The existence of an output schema helps, but the input-semantics gap remains significant.

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 never mentions either parameter. 'email_id' is guessable, but 'user_confirmed' has no stated semantics — the agent cannot tell whether it must be true, what it confirms, or what happens when it is false.

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 concrete verb ('Withdraw') on a specific resource ('marketing email') and clearly bounds the action to emails that have not yet gone out. It distinguishes this tool from publishing tools and broader unpublish siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast it with the similarly named 'cancel_scheduled_publish'.

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 is explicit about when the tool is useful: only while the send is still pending. It also gives a clear when-not condition by noting that delivered emails stay delivered. However, it names no alternative or fallback, so it does not fully earn a 5.

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