Mute an account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. The description adds meaningful context: the action is private ('without them knowing') and reversible. It does not contradict any annotation and goes beyond the structured fields with behavioral nuance.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action, the second adds key properties (private, reversible), the third contrasts with block. No unnecessary words.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and robust annotations, the description fully covers what an agent needs to understand the operation. There are no missing critical details such as permissions or side effects beyond what annotations already disclose.

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%: both 'actor' and 'account' have clear descriptions in the schema. The description adds no extra param-level meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource ('Hide an account's posts from your feeds') and clearly differentiates itself from a block by stating the target can still see and reply. It is unambiguous what the tool does and how it differs from related actions.

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 gives clear context for when to use it ('Unlike a block, they can still see and reply to you') and implies when not to use a block. It does not explicitly name the unmute_account alternative, but the reversible nature is stated, which helps an agent understand the lifecycle.

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