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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive write, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: login requirement, that the target is not notified, that their profile stays visible, and that muted=false reverses the effect. It does not mention permission requirements or rate limits, so 4.

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 labeled, front-loaded sections: the login/parameter semantics block first, then the sibling-routing block. Every clause about notifications, visibility, and restoration earns its place; no filler.

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 login-gated mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, side effects on the target, and reversibility. Missing only edge cases such as interaction with an existing block or unauthenticated behavior.

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% and the `muted` field already carries a description ('true 不看 TA | false 恢复看'). The description restates the true/false effect in more detail, which helps, but userId semantics are only covered by the schema. 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 verb+resource: setting mute on another user's moments so they stop appearing in the viewer's own feed. It explicitly distinguishes scope from `block_user` (full disconnect) and from skipping an individual post, so an agent can tell it apart from adjacent siblings.

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?

Names the alternative action (`block_user`) for the stronger case and states the condition that makes this tool unnecessary (just don't want to see one post). Both when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are covered.

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