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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing idempotency ('sets the state you pass rather than toggling, so repeating a call is safe'), scope of effect (only this user's view, nothing changes for seller/other buyers), and the auth requirement. This is exactly the extra context annotations don't 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?

Front-loads the when-to-use triggers before the behavioral caveats, which is the right order. It is dense but each clause carries information; the enumeration of example phrases is a touch long for the marginal benefit.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description fully covers scope, safety, idempotency, and auth. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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 100% so the schema already documents both params; the description still adds value by explaining the state-set semantics of 'muted' and the unmute direction. Slightly above the baseline given the semantic clarification.

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 (mute/unmute a listing) and clearly bounds the effect to the user's own view of the live offer book. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like make_offer_on_listing or cancel_my_listing without opening any schema.

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?

Provides explicit trigger phrases ('hide this one', 'stop showing me that', 'unmute that listing') and a scenario ('after deciding not to make an offer'). It also disambiguates the mute vs unmute direction, leaving little to inference.

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