discord_send_webhook_message

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, open-world, non-destructive write. The description adds genuinely new information: the server resolves the webhook token itself, so the caller needs only webhook_id and no secret. It stops short of describing irreversibility or rate limits, but it adds real context beyond the annotation set.

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, both front-loaded and free of filler; the token-lookup note follows the primary action naturally.

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?

With no output schema and a nested embed object, the description is nearly sufficient, but it never says what comes back (e.g. the created message id) and leaves the max-length content field unaddressed. Minor gaps for a simple post operation.

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 75%, so the schema documents the embed structure, username, and webhook_id; the description only restates the optional display-name behavior. It adds no meaning for the undocumented 'content' parameter, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource ('Post a message through a webhook') and adds the distinguishing mode (webhook vs. bot-authored post), which separates it from discord_send_message even though that sibling is never named. Clear, though sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not guidance. The description never explains why an agent would choose a webhook post over discord_send_message or discord_send_file, nor does it note prerequisites such as the webhook having to exist.

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