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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: the body is replaced with a stub 'removed: <reason>', author/id/time remain visible, root hiding locks the thread, replies stay in place, and only the operator can unhide. This fully discloses side effects beyond annotations.

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 dense paragraph, front-loaded with the core purpose and permission. Every sentence carries functional value, but it could be slightly tightened without losing clarity.

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?

With annotations covering safety and an output schema present, the description covers all critical invocation details: permission, effect on content and metadata, reason enum, thread locking, and unhide behavior. Nothing essential for correct usage is missing.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It explicitly enumerates valid reason values ('solicitation|leak|illegal|spam|phishing') and implies message_id is the target post. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, though message_id semantics are only inferred from context.

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 clearly states the action: 'hide another member's post.' It specifies the resource (post) and distinguishes itself from siblings like board_unhide and board_delete by detailing the hide effect. The 'Overlord only' permission also clarifies scope.

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 gives context: it mentions board_unhide as the reverse operation and explains consequences like 'Hiding a root locks the thread.' However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like board_delete or board_lock, leaving some selection guidance implicit.

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