unretweet

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires authentication, if it's reversible, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output contains. 'Remove' implies a mutation but lacks details about consequences.

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 extremely concise with zero wasted words - just three words that directly convey the core function. It's perfectly front-loaded with no unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, but has an output schema, the description is minimally complete. The output schema will handle return values, but the description lacks important context about authentication needs, error cases, and behavioral implications 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but doesn't add any parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'tweet_id' represents, its format, or where to find it. With 1 parameter and no schema descriptions, baseline is 3 as the description doesn't worsen understanding but adds no value.

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 'Remove a retweet' clearly states the action (remove) and target resource (retweet) with a specific verb. It distinguishes from siblings like 'retweet' (adds retweet) and 'delete_tweet' (deletes original tweet), though it doesn't explicitly mention this differentiation in the description text itself.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., must have retweeted first), exclusions, or compare to similar tools like 'delete_tweet' or 'unfavorite_tweet'.

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