Unlink a tracker

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true; the description goes beyond by specifying what is destroyed (stored tokens) and disclosing the safety mechanism — the previous state is snapshotted before the write and can be reverted via nuvio_undo. This adds decision-relevant context about reversibility that annotations do not carry.

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 tight sentences: the first states the core action, the second discloses the snapshot/undo safety behavior. No redundant phrasing or schema repetition; essential information is front-loaded.

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 destructive 3-param tool with no output schema, the description plus annotations cover what is removed, that it is destructive, that a preview is returned without confirm (via schema), and how to revert. The only gap is the undocumented profile_id parameter and no mention of what the preview/response looks like.

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 67% — confirm and tracker are described in the schema, so the description need not repeat them. However, the description adds no parameter-specific guidance and does not compensate for profile_id's missing schema description; 'on a profile' only weakly hints at profile_id's role. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific action — 'Remove stored tokens for a tracker on a profile' — with a precise verb, resource (stored tokens), and scope (profile). This differentiates it from siblings like nuvio_link_tracker (the reverse operation) and nuvio_set_tracker_settings (configuration, not credentials).

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 makes the intent clear: remove stored tracker credentials from a profile, implying when to reach for it (when unlinking a tracker relation). It does not explicitly name the counterpart nuvio_link_tracker or state when not to use it, so clear context without explicit exclusions keeps it at a 4.

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