Update member

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

Annotations only flag readOnlyHint and destructiveHint as false; the description adds behavioral caveats such as voice changes requiring the member to be connected to voice. It doesn't mention permission requirements or reversibility, but the added context is meaningful beyond the 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no redundant information. The structure is efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the tool's main purpose and key limitation (voice-only changes), and the schema fills in parameter details. For a mutation tool without output schema, this is reasonably 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 coverage is 57%, with guild, member, nickname, and move_to_voice described. The description adds clarity by grouping server_mute/server_deafen/move_to_voice as voice changes, but doesn't detail reason or boolean semantics beyond parameter names. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description partially compensates.

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 'Edit a member's nickname or voice state' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from role changes by pointing to assign_role/remove_role. It is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools.

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?

It provides explicit guidance that role changes belong in assign_role/remove_role, and notes voice changes only apply while connected, giving context for when the tool is applicable. However, it doesn't outline all scenarios or prerequisites beyond that.

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