block_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the key behavioral outcome (prevents seeing content and interacting). However, it doesn't mention reversibility, notification of the blocked user, or side effects on existing interactions.

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 (14 words) that immediately states the action and effect. Every word adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the main effect, though it lacks a parameter description and does not differentiate from the similar sibling 'mute_user'.

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 single required parameter 'actor' is not described in the schema (0% coverage) and the tool description does not mention it either. The agent must infer that 'actor' is the user to block, which is ambiguous without explicit clarification.

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?

Description clearly uses 'block a user' with a specific verb and resource, and explains the effect ('prevent them from seeing your content and interacting with you'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'mute_user' (less severe) and 'unblock_user' (reverse).

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like 'mute_user' or 'report_user', nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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