edit_member

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Edit' (write operation) but omits details like permission requirements, idempotency, or consequences of setting fields to null. The description is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It front-loads the main action, but key details are omitted. The conciseness is acceptable but at the expense of completeness.

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?

Given the tool edits a guild member with 5 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention that user_id and guild_id must exist, what happens on success, or side effects. The abundance of sibling tools further demands more context.

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 0%, yet the description only lists the editable fields without explaining parameter types or meanings. For example, it does not clarify that 'deaf' and 'mute' are boolean or how 'nick' behaves. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 clearly states the action ('Edit a guild member') and specifies the editable fields (nickname, voice mute/deafen state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kick_member, ban_member, etc., which perform different operations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_member_role, remove_member_role, or timeout_member. The description does not mention prerequisites or context for editing a member.

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