bale_block_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say what blocking entails (e.g., suppressing inbound messages), whether the action is reversible, whether it requires connection/authentication, or any rate limits — all relevant for a mutation tool.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be self-sufficient for a mutation tool.

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. However, with no annotations and no guidance on authentication or reversibility, the definition is only minimally complete for an action that alters user relationships.

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. "By user ID" does identify that the single parameter is a user identifier, adding marginal meaning, but gives no format or sourcing hints (e.g., from bale_search_user) beyond the schema's integer type.

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 ("Block") and resource ("a user") with the identifier scope, so the action is immediately clear. It does not differentiate from the sibling bale_unblock_user or clarify blocking semantics, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the reciprocal tool bale_unblock_user or the read-only bale_get_blocked_users sibling, and no prerequisites such as needing an authenticated session. The agent must infer everything about context.

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