discord_list_invites

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys a read-only operation and the key 'active' filter, but it does not disclose behavior around the optional guild_id, invite expiration semantics, or error conditions. This is a minimum viable disclosure, not a full one.

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, efficient sentence with no fluff. The action and subject are front-loaded, and every word contributes meaning.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, but the description still lacks useful context around the optional guild_id parameter and the scope of one invocation. It is adequate for a minimal list operation, but it leaves a few practical invocation details to inference.

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 0%, so the description is expected to compensate. It only says 'for a guild', which simply mirrors the property name 'guild_id'. It does not explain the null default, acceptable ID format, or what happens when the parameter is omitted.

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 'List active invites for a guild' uses a specific verb, a clear resource, and a scoping context. It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling invite creation/deletion tools and from listing channels, roles, or members.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'List', but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor provide any exclusion or prerequisite. An agent can infer the intent from the name, but there is no direct guidance.

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