delete_block

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('Unblock a user') but lacks behavioral details: it doesn't specify permissions required, whether the operation is reversible, error conditions (e.g., if no block exists), or what happens on success. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose ('Unblock a user.') followed by parameter details. It's efficient with two sentences, though the Args section could be integrated more smoothly. No wasted words, but minor structural improvements are possible.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It explains parameters well but lacks critical context: what the tool returns, error handling, side effects, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'list_blocks'. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters in the Args section: 'user_id: The ID of the user doing the unblocking' and 'other_user_id: The ID of the user to unblock.' This adds clear meaning beyond the schema's titles ('User Id', 'Other User Id'), distinguishing the roles of the two user IDs.

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 states 'Unblock a user' which is a clear verb+resource, but it contradicts the tool name 'delete_block' (suggesting deletion of a block rather than unblocking). The description doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'create_block' or 'check_block' beyond the basic action.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_block' (blocking) or 'check_block' (checking block status). The description doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing an existing block to unblock, or context for when unblocking is appropriate.

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