set_idle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does disclose the key non-obvious side effect: it resets to the default the moment they next message. It also explains the two meaningful value semantics (60 = hourly, 0 = pause). It omits any permission or scope prerequisites, keeping it short of a 5.

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-loaded with the purpose, then the practical example, then the reset note and an Args block. Every sentence contributes; the only minor cost is the slightly redundant Args listing, but it earns its place given zero schema descriptions.

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 explained. For a two-parameter configuration tool the description covers purpose, both params, value semantics, and the auto-reset behavior. It lacks only permission/prerequisite disclosure, which is minor here.

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, and it does: minutes is defined as the quiet-time threshold in minutes with 0 meaning pause, and to is described as a chat alias that can be omitted for the sole subscribed target. Both of the two parameters gain meaning beyond the bare schema.

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-plus-resource: tuning how long a chat must be quiet before an idle nudge fires. This is clearly distinct from all siblings (subscribe, mute_thread, etc.), none of which manage idle-nudge timing. It stops just short of naming a sibling or scope boundary, so 4 rather than 5.

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?

Gives concrete usage context: ramp it up to back off (60 = hourly) or set 0 to pause. It also flags the auto-reset behavior. There are no explicit when-not or alternative tools named, but no sibling competes for this job, so the context is clear.

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