discord_server_structure

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool returns only a subset of server data and that it is lighter-weight, which is useful behavioral context. It does not mention auth requirements, error behavior, or handling of an absent guild_id, leaving some transparency gaps.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the primary behavior, then adds a short, relevant comparison to a sibling tool. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description conveys scope and lightweight intent well. The main remaining gap is the lack of guidance about the guild_id parameter's optional/null semantics, but the tool's overall calling context is mostly clear.

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%, and the description does not explain the guild_id parameter or what happens when it is omitted/defaulted to null. The parameter name is self-explanatory to some extent, but the description adds no semantics beyond the schema's bare type/default.

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 ('Return') and names the exact resources returned ('category/channel tree and roles'). It also contrasts itself with a sibling tool ('lighter than discord_analyze_server'), making its scope easy to distinguish.

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 phrase 'lighter than discord_analyze_server' indicates when this tool should be chosen over the heavier analysis tool. However, it does not explicitly address alternatives like discord_list_channels or discord_list_roles, so the guidance is clear for one sibling but not fully comprehensive.

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