set_group_banMute a group member for a specified duration in seconds to enforce rules or manage disruptive behavior.
禁言群内指定成员，duration 单位为秒。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user_id | Yes | 成员QQ号 | |
| duration | Yes | 禁言时长（秒） | |
| group_id | Yes | 群号 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly=false, so the description does not need to state that mutating occurs, but it adds little beyond that. It fails to mention that a duration of 0 unmutes the member, whether a re-ban resets the timer, or any permission requirements. The only added fact—duration in seconds—duplicates the schema's property description.
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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and target, then clarifies the duration unit. There is no filler or redundant content.
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?
The tool is simple and all required parameters are documented, so the description is minimally viable. However, it omits a practically important behavior—using duration=0 to remove a ban—and provides no guidance on permissions or edge cases, which leaves a visible gap for a mutating action without an output schema.
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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention that duration is in seconds adds no new information beyond the schema's existing '禁言时长（秒）' description.
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 uses a specific verb '禁言' (mute) and a clear resource '群内指定成员' (specified group member), which distinguishes it from siblings like set_group_whole_ban that target the entire group. The title and description align on the operation being performed.
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 phrase '指定成员' implies this tool is for muting an individual member rather than the whole group, which offers some context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as set_group_whole_ban or state when not to use this tool, leaving usage guidance mostly implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.