End poll

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

Annotations reveal that the tool is neither read-only (readOnlyHint: false) nor destructive (destructiveHint: false). The description adds behavioral context: 'early' indicates a timing nuance and 'finalize the results' implies votes stop being accepted and results are computed, which is not fully captured by annotations alone.

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?

A single, concise sentence with the verb 'Close' front-loaded. Every word adds value, no redundancy, and the structure is immediately scannable.

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 state-changing action, the description covers the essential behavior. No output schema exists, but the result (finalized results) is implied. One minor gap: it doesn't mention permissions or that the action is irreversible, but the annotations and clarity of scope keep it adequate.

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?

The description adds no parameter-specific details. The input schema covers guild and channel descriptions but leaves message_id undefined. With 67% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description does not compensate for the missing message_id explanation, though the parameter name is fairly intuitive.

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 specific action: 'Close one of the bot's own polls early and finalize the results.' It identifies the resource (polls), the operation (close early, finalize), and a scope constraint (the bot's own polls), distinguishing it from create_poll and get_poll_results.

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 the use case: ending a poll before its natural conclusion. It also sets a constraint ('one of the bot's own polls') that helps exclude inappropriate usage. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the clarity of purpose compensates.

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