discord_unban_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioural disclosure. It does reveal a useful guard: 'requires confirm=true when confirmation is enabled', which helps the agent avoid a failed call. However, it does not describe permission requirements, idempotency (what happens if unbanning an already-unbanned user), or other failure modes.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with the core purpose first and the confirm guard second. There is no filler and every phrase earns its place, making the definition concise and scannable.

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 the output schema exists, so the description does not need to be exhaustive. Still, for a mutation tool with no annotations, it lacks clarity on guild_id semantics and the exact behavior when confirmation is enabled but confirm is false, leaving the agent with room for assumptions.

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 for the four parameters. Only the confirm parameter gets meaningful extra context; user_id, reason, and guild_id remain relying on schema titles and default values. This is insufficient for full ambiguity-free invocation.

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 action ('Unban') and resource ('a user'), which is unambiguous and distinguishable from the sibling tools that ban, kick, or timeout members. It is direct and specific, though it relies somewhat on the tool name for sibling differentiation.

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 usage context is implied: this should be used when a user needs to be unbanned, not when banning or kicking. However, the description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like discord_ban_member, nor does it state any preconditions such as the user already being banned.

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