dm_chat_unarchive

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds that it calls Bluesky's unmuteConvo and returns a chat with archived: false. This provides sufficient transparency beyond annotations, though no side effects or prerequisites are mentioned.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the primary action and adding necessary context about the return value. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single parameter, full schema coverage, no output schema, and adequate annotations, the description fully explains the tool's purpose, behavior, and return value without 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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for chat_id. The tool description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 clearly states it unarchives/unmutes a chat, specifies the platform (Bluesky only), calls Bluesky's unmuteConvo, and returns the chat with archived: false. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like dm_chat_archive and dm_chat_get.

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?

While the description doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives, it is clearly the inverse of dm_chat_archive, and the sibling list provides enough context. A slightly higher score would require explicit direction.

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