tokportal_unpublish_bundle

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the name. It does not explain what 'unpublish' means for the bundle’s visibility, associated videos, or whether the operation is reversible. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate—adequate but lacking elaboration.

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, efficient sentence. It is not verbose, but it could be slightly more informative (e.g., hinting at the effect) without losing conciseness. Still, it earns a 4 for being to‑the‑point.

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?

Given this is a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description should explain the effect on the bundle’s state, whether it’s reversible, and what happens to videos within the bundle. It provides none of this context, leaving the agent under‑informed for a destructive operation.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%; both parameters (id, idempotency_key) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter‑specific details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct since schema covers all parameters.

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' uses a specific verb ('Unpublish') and resource ('bundle'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like tokportal_publish_bundle (the inverse), tokportal_delete_comment_task (different entity), and tokportal_unschedule_bundle_video (different resource).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., bundle must be currently published), nor does it advise against using on already‑unpublished bundles or warn about irreversible effects. Sibling tools like tokportal_publish_bundle and tokportal_update_bundle are present but no comparative context is given.

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