discord_list_pins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that — no mention of pagination, pin ordering, permission requirements, or Discord's 50-pin cap per channel. It carries no additional disclosure.

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 no wasted words. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is part of the incompleteness rather than exemplary conciseness.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It does not tell the agent anything about return shape or limitations (e.g., pin cap, ordering), which would help an agent use the result correctly.

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%, and the single channel_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the pattern and the useful note that a thread ID also works. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 ('List') and resource ('pinned messages in a channel'), so the operation is immediately clear. However, it does not differentiate itself from siblings like discord_pin_message, discord_get_message, or discord_read_channel, which an agent must disambiguate from the name alone.

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 is purely a purpose statement with no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as discord_get_message when a specific pin is needed. Usage is only inferable from the tool name.

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