remove_timeout

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('retire') implying a mutation, but doesn't describe effects (e.g., whether it logs the reason, requires permissions, or affects member status), making it insufficient for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 in French that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with zero waste.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a mutation (removing a timeout) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, side effects) and doesn't explain the return values or error cases, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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%, with parameters 'userId' and 'reason' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining the 'reason' parameter's purpose or format, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 'Retire le timeout d'un membre' clearly states the action (remove) and target (timeout of a member) in French. It's specific enough to understand the basic function, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'timeout_member' or 'unban_member' beyond the verb choice.

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 prerequisites (e.g., a member must be timed out first), contrast with 'timeout_member' for setting timeouts, or specify contexts like moderation scenarios.

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