discord_thread_member

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. The description adds real value by clarifying that join/leave act on the bot itself while add/remove target another user, but it omits permission requirements and what happens when a user is already a member.

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 filler; the parenthetical disambiguation of bot vs user is compact and 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?

There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what 'list' returns (identities? pagination?) and whether membership changes need elevated permissions. With five distinct actions bundled in one tool, those gaps leave an agent under-informed.

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 67%: user_id is documented as 'Required for add/remove' and thread_id is labeled. The description only restates the add/remove need for a user, adding no format, ID-sourcing, or validity guidance 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?

The description names the resource (thread membership) and enumerates the concrete operations (join/leave, add/remove a user, list), which maps cleanly onto the action enum. It is distinguishable from siblings like discord_list_members and discord_list_threads, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 action list implies when each mode applies, and the 'join/leave (the bot)' vs 'add/remove a user' split gives useful routing context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance against alternatives (e.g. discord_moderate_member for removing a member) and no prerequisites stated.

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