discord_remove_timeout

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the core mutation but does not address what happens if the member has no active timeout, whether the action is idempotent, what permissions are required, or any side effects. A mutation tool with this little context should disclose more.

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 efficient sentence with no filler. The key action and target are front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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, single-action tool, this is minimally viable: it identifies the action and target. However, it is not complete enough as the only context source because it lacks behavior nuance, permission context, and explanation of optional parameters. The output schema helps but is secondary to the missing behavioral and parameter context.

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 0% description coverage, and the tool description only adds semantic meaning for 'member' in relation to the member_id parameter. It does not explain the role of guild_id or reason, nor how they relate to the operation. Given the low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 verb and resource: 'Remove an active timeout from a member.' It clearly identifies the action and target, and it can be distinguished from sibling tools like discord_timeout_member without needing the schema.

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 word 'active' implies the tool should be used when a member currently has a timeout, but the description does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. It also does not mention when no active timeout exists or when a different action like discord_remove_role would be appropriate.

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