set_group_whole_ban

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action. It does not explain that this is a state-changing operation toggleable via the enable parameter, whether admin permissions are required, whether the effect is reversible, or what response is returned.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the core function, making it appropriately concise.

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?

Even with full schema coverage, the description is incomplete for a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. It omits the enabling/unmuting behavior implied by the enable parameter, permission needs, side effects, and when to use this tool over the related set_group_ban sibling.

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?

The schema already covers both parameters (group_id and enable) at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further parameter context, but the schema descriptions are sufficient for basic usage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Mute') with a clear resource and scope ('all members in group'). This distinguishes it from siblings like set_group_ban, which targets individual members, so an agent can immediately understand what the tool does.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention that this tool is for muting the entire group as opposed to an individual member, nor does it reference any alternative tool like set_group_ban or set_group_kick.

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