block_user

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

The annotations already indicate destructive behavior, but the description adds meaningful context: blocking prevents the user from writing and explains the story-blocklist behavior with my_stories_from=True. This goes beyond the annotations and provides behavioral transparency about the tool's side effects.

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 extremely concise, using only two sentences. It leads with the core action and consequence, then briefly covers the parameter nuance. No wasted words; the structure is clear and front-loaded.

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 tool's simple nature (2 params, output schema exists, annotations provided), the description is adequate but has gaps. It does not explain the 'user' parameter format, the full scope of blocking vs. story-only, or mention that unblock_user reverses this action. It covers the main behavior but leaves room for improvement.

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 has zero description coverage (0%). The description explains only the 'my_stories_from' parameter (story-blocklist nuance) but fails to clarify the required 'user' parameter, which remains ambiguous in terms of format or semantics. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate more but falls short.

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 the tool's verb and resource: 'Заблокировать пользователя' (Block user) and specifies the consequence ('он не сможет писать' – he won't be able to write). This distinguishes it from related tools like unblock_user and ban_participant, making the purpose 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 implies usage context by stating the blocking effect, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., unblock_user, ban_participant). The nuance about my_stories_from is a usage hint for a specific scenario, but overall guidance is minimal.

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