Search members

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read, but the description adds behavior beyond that: 'Name search uses Discord's member search; role filtering walks the member list and reports if it hit the paging cap.' This discloses implementation details and a potential limitation, which is valuable for the agent.

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 purpose, then alternatives, then behavioral notes. No redundancy or wasted words. Highly 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 read-only search tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and key behavioral caveats. It could mention return format or interaction between query and role, but the guidance is strong enough for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a bit of nuance (name fragment vs prefix, paging cap for role filtering), but does not substantially improve on the schema's parameter descriptions. It remains at baseline.

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's function: 'Find specific members by a name fragment, or list those holding a given role.' It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly referencing list_members, get_member, and find, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'For the whole roster use list_members; for one member's full profile use get_member; to turn a fuzzy name into an id use find.' Also mentions the role-filtering paging cap, setting expectations for edge cases.

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