discord_invites

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the action names—no auth requirements, rate limits, or explanation of what delete actually destroys—so it contributes little beyond the structured annotations.

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 two short sentences with no wasted words, and the action list is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized, though its extreme brevity means it delegates nearly all useful detail elsewhere.

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?

This is a destructive, open-world, multi-action tool with nested body/query/params objects and no output schema, yet the description does not explain any action's semantics, required IDs, or effects. It points to discord_help, but that delegation leaves the description itself incomplete for an agent deciding how to invoke it safely.

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?

With schema description coverage at 83%, the schema already documents most parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no semantic detail about body, query, params, or reason beyond instructing the agent to consult discord_help, leaving the schema to carry the parameter meaning.

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 identifies the resource ('Discord invites') and enumerates five actions, but it does not use a clear prose verb or explain what each action does. It relies on the action names and a pointer to discord_help, making it minimally viable rather than fully clear.

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 only guidance is to call discord_help with group="invites" and the action for required IDs, fields, limits, and examples. There is no statement of when to use this tool versus sibling tools like discord_guild or discord_channels, nor any when-not guidance.

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