Edit Server Onboarding

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive, idempotent write operation. The description adds context about returning updated configuration and the purpose of prompts. No contradictions or missing behavioral traits beyond 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 compact (approx. 100 words), front-loaded with purpose, then explanatory sentences, then bulleted args, then return statement. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 absence of an output schema, the description mentions the return type. It covers the main aspects of the tool, though it could briefly note that existing prompts require IDs for updates (covered in schema). Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a tool with rich schema annotations.

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 100% with detailed descriptions. The description provides a high-level summary of parameters but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already offers, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 tool name and description clearly state it edits server onboarding. It explains what onboarding entails (prompts/questions, role/channel assignment) and distinguishes from sibling tools like discord_get_onboarding and discord_setup_onboarding.

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 implies editing existing onboarding but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., discord_setup_onboarding for initial setup) or provide conditions like requiring existing onboarding configuration.

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