discord_polls

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

Annotations already flag this as destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world, but the description adds almost no behavioral context beyond repeating the action enum. It does not explain what 'end' does to a poll, whether ending is reversible, what permissions are needed, or what 'voters' returns.

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 filler and the resource and actions are front-loaded. The first sentence largely restates the tool name, but overall it is efficiently structured.

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 destructive, open-world tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description provides only a pointer to discord_help and the action names. It leaves out action outcomes, return behavior, permissions, and the practical meaning of ending a poll, so an agent cannot call it safely without consulting another tool.

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 at 83%, so the schema already carries most parameter meaning. The description adds only a general pointer to discord_help for action-specific required IDs, request fields, limits, and examples, which is useful but does not explain any parameter directly.

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 as Discord polls and lists the two supported actions, voters and end, so an agent can tell this is poll-specific rather than a general message tool. It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling tool, but the domain and action list are clear enough to distinguish it in practice.

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 tells the agent to call discord_help for required IDs and request fields, which is useful prerequisite guidance, but it gives no explicit conditions for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The action names imply usage but do not constitute real when-to-use guidance.

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