Bulk ban

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

The description discloses the two-step behavior (first call is preview, second performs bans) and result reporting, which goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation. It does not cover auth requirements or rate limits but is sufficiently transparent for usage.

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 three sentences, front-loads the purpose, then adds workflow details without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 destructive nature and complexity of the tool (two-step bulk ban), the description covers the essential workflow and outcome. It lacks mention of permission requirements but remains adequate for an agent to decide on use.

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 low (33%), and the description adds meaning for 'user_ids' and 'confirm_token' but does not explain 'guild', 'reason', 'delete_message_seconds', or 'dry_run' in relation to the workflow. The 'dry_run' parameter is partially covered by describing the first call as a preview, but not explicitly.

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 tool bans up to 200 users by ID, specifically for raid cleanup, using specific verb+resource+scope. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'ban_member' tool.

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 explains the safe two-step call process and mentions 'for raid cleanup', providing context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools like 'ban_member'.

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