x_api_block_users_dms

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states the mutation risk, required OAuth scopes, environment-selection behavior, common failure conditions, and a safety warning to validate scope/payload/authorizationKey. This provides substantial transparency beyond the structured schema.

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 well-structured with clear labels (Use when, Risk, Required permissions, etc.), making it scannable. The example is useful. Minor redundancy exists with 'Use when: Block DMs.' repeating the purpose, but overall it is efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides a comprehensive set of context: permissions, environment-selection, expected response shape, common failures, and recommended related tools. It lacks explicit definition of the 'id' parameter's meaning, but the overall coverage is strong for a wrapper tool.

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 compensate. It does explain auth-related parameters (scopeTenantId, scopeUserId, scopeAccountId, credentialKey) and marks id as path/required, but it does not clarify the semantic meaning of 'id' or 'authorizationKey'/'preferredAuthType'. This partial compensation earns a middle score.

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 opens with 'Block DMs.', a clear verb+resource statement that conveys the tool's primary action. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling x_api_unblock_users_dms by using the opposite verb. However, it does not explicitly clarify that 'id' refers to a user ID or what exactly gets blocked (e.g., DMs from a specific user).

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 'Use when' section simply restates 'Block DMs.', providing no additional guidance on when to choose this tool over other DM-related siblings like x_api_unblock_users_dms or x_api_create_direct_messages_conversation. The 'Do not use when' provides only general exploration/auth exceptions, not tool-specific alternatives.

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