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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's job is to add beyond that. It does: it discloses the authorization requirement (admins/moderators) and the state filter ('waiting for review', implying resolved reports are excluded). Ordering, pagination, and volume are still unstated, keeping it short of a 5.

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, roughly a dozen words, with the resource and its state front-loaded before the access restriction. Nothing is repeated and nothing is padding.

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 single-parameter, read-only listing tool with full schema documentation and complete annotations, the description covers what it returns (the unreviewed report queue) and who may call it. Missing only operational detail such as pagination or result ordering, which is minor here.

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% for the single 'group' parameter, including an example format, so the schema carries the load. The description adds no meaning about the group argument (scoping, permissions per group, or behavior when the group is invalid), so baseline 3 applies.

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 names the specific resource and scope: posts that members reported and that are still awaiting review, which implicitly separates it from list_posts. It does not explicitly name a sibling or state that it is a listing operation, but combined with the title the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

'Admins and moderators only' gives an access precondition, but there is no explicit statement of when to choose this over list_posts, search_group, or moderation-adjacent siblings, and no exclusions. Usage is inferable from the moderation-queue framing but not spelled out.

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