Update onboarding

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

The description adds a behavioral note about Discord's app requiring at least seven default channels while the API accepts fewer, which is useful context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate non-destructive and non-read-only, so the description adds value.

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 concise with two sentences. The first sentence effectively states the primary purpose. The second sentence adds an observational note which is somewhat tangential but not harmful. Could be slightly more structured but is efficient overall.

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 main aspects of the tool but lacks details about parameter interactions (e.g., mode semantics), prerequisites (Community server must have onboarding enabled), and partial update behavior. Given the complexity of the schema and no output schema, more context would be helpful.

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 provides a high-level overview of parameters (prompts, default_channels, enabled) but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions (60% coverage). The note about default channels is behavioral, not semantic. Schema already details structures.

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 it configures the new-member onboarding flow on a Community server, specifying the components it handles: prompts with options, default channels, and enabled state. This distinguishes it from other update tools and aligns with the tool name.

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 use for modifying onboarding settings, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_onboarding or other update tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are given.

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