discord_create_invite

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. However, the description adds nothing about required permissions (Manage Channel), whether invites can be revoked, or how max_uses/temporary interact. For a mutation tool with open-world side effects, this is a notable gap.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero redundancy. It is appropriately sized, though it is arguably too terse to be maximally useful — concision alone doesn't compensate for missing guidance.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description should at least indicate what the returned invite link is or any permission/expiry caveats. It leaves that entirely to the schema, so an agent knows the action but not its operational 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter documented including defaults (max_age_seconds default 86400) and semantics (0 = unlimited). The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (invite link) with a scope qualifier (for a channel), so an agent can distinguish it from sibling tools like discord_create_channel or discord_list_invites. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. Nothing tells the agent why it would pick create_invite over, say, create_webhook or when a channel is eligible for an invite. Only the bare purpose is implied.

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