set_conversation_closed

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint, and the description adds that closing only hides notification context and does not leave channels or remove members. This clarifies the non-destructive nature beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 very concise: two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states the primary action and required parameters; the second adds a crucial behavioral clarification. Every sentence serves a 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, what parameters are needed, its behavioral implications, and what it does not do. The annotations and output schema (implied) complement the description well.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description further clarifies that channel and dm are mutually exclusive (inline with schema's 'not' constraint) and explains the closed parameter's effect and scope. This adds value beyond 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 uses specific verbs ('set') and resources ('conversation closed/visible state'), clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes this tool from leaving a channel by stating it only hides notification context. It explicitly mentions the required parameters and the effect.

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 implies usage by stating 'Provide either channel or dm, plus closed', guiding parameter selection. It warns that closing does not leave channels or remove members, which helps prevent misuse. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives like leave_channel.

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