discord_members

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 lists the actions but does not distinguish which are read-only (list/get/search) versus destructive (kick/prune), which would be valuable given this is a mixed tool; it does point to discord_help for limits.

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, front-loaded sentences: resource name, then action enumeration, then the help directive. No wasted text, and the routing cue (discord_help) is clearly placed.

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 ten-action router tool with nested params and no output schema, delegating detail to discord_help is reasonable, but the description omits behavioral differentiation among actions (read vs destructive) and offers no hint about which actions require the reason or files fields, leaving gaps relative to the tool's complexity.

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 high (83%), so the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description adds value by directing the agent to discord_help with the specific group and action to learn per-action required IDs, request fields, and limits, which compensates for the enum-driven variability of params across the ten actions.

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 opening 'Discord members' is terse, but the action list (list, get, search, edit, edit_me, add_role, remove_role, kick, prune_count, prune) makes clear this is the member-management tool for Discord. The resource is named and clearly distinguishes it from siblings like discord_roles or discord_channels.

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 description tells the agent how to obtain details by calling discord_help with group='members', which is useful routing guidance. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives (e.g., why members vs roles for role changes) and no exclusions.

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