Accounts you have muted

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the core safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context: it does not mention pagination, ordering, result format, or that the list may change as new mutes are added. No value is added beyond the structured annotations.

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 terse clause with no filler, and it is front-loaded. It is efficient in length, though it borders on under-specification because it provides almost no operational detail beyond the title.

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 read-only paginated list, the schema and annotations cover a fair amount of context. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not clarify expected return shape, ordering, or that it refers specifically to account mutes rather than conversation mutes. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 all three parameters (limit, max_id, account) have useful schema descriptions. The tool description itself contributes no parameter-level meaning, so the high schema coverage carries the load and the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 is essentially the title restated as a noun phrase: 'Accounts you have muted.' It identifies the resource clearly but uses no verb and does not differentiate from sibling list tools like get_blocks or from mute_account. It is understandable, but it adds little beyond what the tool name and title already imply.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_blocks, mute_account, or get_conversations. The description names no context, no exclusions, and no conditions that would help an agent choose between this and related tools.

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