Disconnect member from voice

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by clarifying that the member stays in the server and only the voice connection ends, which is not apparent from annotations alone. It could mention permission requirements or behavior if the member is not in voice, but the added value is solid.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the action verb 'Remove', and every word adds value. There is no redundancy or filler, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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 simple tool with two annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior well. It omits edge cases like what happens if the member is not in a voice channel or required permissions, but the essential use case is fully clear. Given the simplicity, this is nearly complete.

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 67% (guild and member are described; reason is not). The description itself provides no parameter-specific guidance or clarifications, such as how defaults work or what 'member' formats are accepted. It does not compensate for the incomplete schema coverage, offering no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('member from whatever voice channel'), making the action unambiguous. The second sentence explicitly differentiates it from server removal, distinguishing it from sibling tools like kick_member and ban_member.

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 provides clear context by stating the member remains in the server and only the voice connection ends, which implies when to use this tool versus more severe actions. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state 'when not to use' it, though the boundary is well-implied.

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