discord_events

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true and non-idempotent, and the description adds essentially nothing beyond that profile — no note on what delete destroys, permission requirements, or rate limits, only a pointer that limits exist in discord_help. The action list (including delete) is consistent with the annotations, so there is no contradiction, but the added behavioral value is minimal.

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, resource and action set front-loaded, with the help pointer second. No filler, though the payoff of the second sentence is purely a redirect.

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, nested, destructive tool with no output schema, the description is a thin wrapper that outsources nearly all detail to discord_help. The explicit handoff makes it usable, but an agent gets no self-contained understanding of return values, limits, or per-action behavior.

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 83%, so the schema already documents body, files, query, params and reason in useful detail. The description only defers to discord_help for 'required IDs, request fields, limits and examples', adding no semantics beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 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?

The description names the resource (Discord events) and enumerates the exact action set (list, get, create, edit, delete, users), which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings such as discord_guild or discord_channels. It stops short of saying what an 'event' is (e.g., scheduled guild events), so the resource is named but not characterized.

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?

It lists the available actions and directs the agent to discord_help with group="events" for per-action schemas, which is genuine routing guidance. However, it never says when to pick this tool over a sibling or what preconditions apply, leaving selection logic implicit.

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