Toggle author signatures on channel posts

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

The description adds no behavioral disclosure beyond the scope constraint. Annotations provide idempotentHint and openWorldHint, but the description does not explain side effects, reversal, or what toggling signatures actually does beyond the title. The description carries the burden here due to lack of readOnly/destructive annotations, and it fails to provide meaningful behavioral context.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with a single sentence that delivers a clear scope warning. Every word earns its place. However, it is under-specified in terms of content, but that is more about completeness than conciseness.

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 simple tool but no output schema and zero parameter documentation, the description is far too thin. It lacks a purpose statement, parameter guidance, and behavioral details. The 'Broadcast channels only' line is useful but insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters (peer, enabled, accountId). It does not help the agent understand what values to pass or their meaning. The description entirely fails to compensate for the lack of parameter details in the 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?

The description 'Broadcast channels only' provides a scope constraint but does not actually state what the tool does. The title 'Toggle author signatures on channel posts' gives the verb and resource, but the description itself lacks a purpose statement. It is not misleading, but it is vague and relies on the title for meaning.

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 description explicitly scopes usage to broadcast channels, making it clear when this tool is appropriate. It implies that it should not be used for other channel types, though it does not mention alternatives or provide explicit exclusions beyond that scope.

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