Stop being notified about replies to this thread, without leaving it

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

Annotations already establish that the tool is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations by stating that muting does not require leaving the thread, which clarifies the key side effect an agent needs to know.

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 first sentence is a tight, front-loaded description of the tool's purpose. The second sentence is a stylistic aside that does not add operational value, so it is not flawless, but overall the description is still appropriately short.

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 two-parameter, idempotent mutation with no output schema, the description plus annotations cover what the tool does and its main side effect. It could explicitly point to unmute_conversation as the reversal, but nothing essential for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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%, with both id and account already documented including how account matching works and the default. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so it correctly sits at the schema-covered baseline of 3.

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 first sentence states a specific action and resource: stop being notified about replies to this thread without leaving it. This clearly scopes the tool to conversation-level muting and distinguishes it from account-level mute tools and the sibling unmute_conversation. The added flavor sentence does not obscure the purpose.

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 a use case with 'until a post goes unexpectedly wide' but provides no explicit guidance about when to choose this over alternatives like mute_account or how to reverse it with unmute_conversation. This is only implied usage context, not actionable when/when-not guidance.

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