tokportal_unpublish_bundle

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description carries a lower burden. However, it adds no behavioral context whatsoever—no details on what unpublishing entails, whether it can be reversed, or if it has side effects on related resources.

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?

The description is a single sentence that merely repeats the name. It is under-specified rather than concise, offering no useful information for a tool with two parameters and destructive behavior.

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?

Despite having only two parameters and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or the effect of the operation, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (id, idempotency_key) are documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, achieving the baseline score.

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 'Unpublish a bundle.' is a tautology of the tool name and title. It restates the verb+resource without adding any new information or distinguishing from sibling tools like publish_bundle or update_bundle.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., updating a bundle, creating a new one). There is no mention of prerequisites, sequencing, or when not to use it.

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