newsletter_mute

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It discloses the confirmation gate ('Requires confirm=true') and implies a mutating toggle, which is useful, but it does not describe side effects, idempotency, or reversibility. This is adequate but not rich.

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 one short sentence with the action front-loaded and the critical prerequisite appended. Every word contributes; there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 3-parameter toggle, the description plus schema gives an agent enough to call it: jid, muted, and confirm=true. But with no annotations or output schema, a bit more context about the effect of muting and the confirmation failure mode would make it fully self-sufficient.

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 only 33%, and the description helps by mapping 'mute/unmute' to the muted boolean and by flagging confirm as required. It adds no meaning for jid, which is the only required parameter and is left as a bare string in 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 action ('Mute/unmute') on a clear resource ('a channel'), which is more than a tautology and aligns with the tool name newsletter_mute. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like newsletter_follow or newsletter_unfollow, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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 names the operation and the prerequisite 'Requires confirm=true', so it tells the agent how to invoke it correctly. However, it doesn't specify when to choose this over sibling tools such as newsletter_unfollow or list_newsletters, leaving selection largely to inference from the tool name.

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