Remove Channel Permission Overrides

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

The description states it removes 'all' permission overrides, which adds clarity beyond the annotations. However, it does not discuss side effects, reversibility, or required permissions. Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent nature, so the description adds moderate value.

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 concise and front-loaded. However, it includes inline 'Args:' and 'Returns:' sections that mostly duplicate the input schema, slightly reducing efficiency. Still, it remains clear and to the point.

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 tool with low complexity (2 params, simple operation) and good annotations, the description adequately covers the purpose and return value ('Confirmation of removal'). Yet, it lacks mention of idempotency or potential error cases, leaving some gaps.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description reiterates the parameters but adds no additional context beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate further.

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 clearly states the action: 'Remove all permission overrides for a role or member on a channel.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the sibling tools include related operations like set_channel_permissions, making the distinction evident.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as discord_set_channel_permissions or discord_sync_channel_permissions. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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