discord_member_role

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world mutation, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds a genuinely useful hierarchy precondition, but says nothing about reversibility, idempotency, or failure modes when the role outranks the bot.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core action stated first and the constraint second. Every sentence earns its place.

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 four-required-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the operation and the key role-hierarchy constraint. However, it omits permission requirements, error behavior, and any indication of what the call returns, leaving gaps an agent would want closed.

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 coverage is 75% with role_id, user_id and guild_id documented inline and action constrained by an add/remove enum. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, 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 and resource: assign or remove a role from a member, which is clearly distinct from sibling role-management tools like discord_create_role, discord_edit_role and discord_delete_role. It does not name those siblings explicitly, but the assign/unassign scope is unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb pair (add vs remove via the action parameter), and one real precondition is given: the role must sit below the bot's highest role. There is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance and no mention of required permissions such as Manage Roles.

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