Create event

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false). The description adds behavioral context: event appears on events list, members can mark interest, and type-specific constraints. It lacks details on permissions or publish behavior but adds value 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, then exclusions, then conditional requirements. No redundant information; 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?

For a 9-parameter, 3-required tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential decision points (event types, dependencies, exclusions). It does not describe the return value but the key usage context is well addressed.

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 67%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by explaining that channel is needed for voice/stage types and location/end_time for external, and gives a start_time format example. It enhances the schema's parameter descriptions for the conditional dependencies.

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 creates a Discord scheduled community event, specifies the three types (voice, stage, external), and differentiates from sibling tools schedule_message and subscribe_events. The verb 'create' and resource 'event' are explicit.

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?

Explicitly provides when-not-to-use instructions by referencing alternatives (schedule_message, subscribe_events) and states conditional requirements for each event type (voice/stage need a channel, external needs location and end_time).

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