Retrieve the list of members currently muted in a specified QQ group chat using its group ID. Use it to monitor group moderation status and identify restricted members.
获取指定群聊当前处于被禁言状态的成员列表 (NapCat 扩展接口: get_group_shut_list)。 :param group_id: 群号
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| group_id | Yes | 群号 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falsev1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that results are 'current' and that this is a NapCat extension interface, but does not state read-only safety, required permissions, rate limits, or return format, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.
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 short and front-loads the purpose. The trailing ':param group_id: 群号' is redundant with the schema, but overall the text remains compact and readable.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential call information. However, it does not describe the return shape or fields, which would help an agent understand what comes back given the lack of an output schema.
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 100%, and the single parameter group_id is fully documented in the schema as '群号'. The description merely repeats that same label, adding no extra meaning beyond 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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving the list of currently muted members in a given group chat. It clearly distinguishes this from general member listing siblings like get_group_member_list by specifying the '被禁言状态' filter.
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 when to use the tool by describing its output, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or any exclusions. For a simple read query this is adequate but leaves routing to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.