discord_moderate_member

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, but the description adds real value on top: required Discord permissions, the human-confirmation protocol, and the semantic meaning of timeout ("mute for N minutes"). It stops short of covering reversibility of ban vs kick or rate-limit/audit-log side effects.

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 tightly packed sentences: the capability list leads, and the permission/confirmation constraints follow. Every clause carries information; nothing is padded.

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 6-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the definition covers actions, permissions, and the safety protocol, and the schema fills in per-parameter bounds and units. It omits what a successful call returns or whether bans are reversible, but that gap is minor given the annotation coverage.

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 83%, so the schema already documents user_id, guild_id, reason, timeout_minutes and delete_message_seconds. The description only slightly enriches the action enum by clarifying that "timeout" means mute for N minutes, which is a marginal addition to what the enum and schema already convey.

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?

Names a specific verb (moderate) and resource (member), then enumerates every supported action: kick, ban, unban, timeout, untimeout. No sibling tool in the list performs member moderation, and an agent can tell instantly what this tool covers.

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 explicit prerequisites ("Needs Kick/Ban/Moderate Members") and a strong usage rule ("Destructive: confirm with the user first"). It does not name when-not to use it or point at an alternative, but no sibling overlaps this capability, so the guidance is nearly complete.

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