Discord MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but reveals little behavioral information. It mentions 'filters' but doesn't explain search behavior (e.g., partial/full text matching, case sensitivity), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens when no results are found. For a search tool with 9 parameters, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it actually behaves.

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 that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the main action and includes key aspects (search, text query, filters). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 search tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the search returns (message objects? summaries?), how results are ordered, pagination behavior, or error conditions. The combination of complex functionality with minimal description leaves the agent poorly equipped to use this tool effectively.

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%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond stating 'text query and filters' - it doesn't explain parameter interactions, default behaviors, or provide examples. With high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 tool searches for messages in a Discord channel with text query and filters. It specifies the verb 'search' and resource 'messages in a Discord channel', distinguishing it from siblings like discord_get_message (single message) or discord_get_message_history (chronological list). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential similar search tools if they existed.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when this search tool is preferred over discord_get_message_history (which might retrieve messages without search) or other message-related tools. There's no context about prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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