discord_create_channel

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

Annotations already establish this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable context beyond that: the auth requirement (Manage Channels permission) and the return payload ('Returns the new channel's name and ID'), which is especially useful since no output schema exists. It doesn't cover failure modes like duplicate-name conflicts, but the added context 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?

Three sentences with no filler: purpose, permission prerequisite, sibling routing, and return value. Every sentence earns its place, and the most decision-relevant information (what it creates and where it doesn't apply) is front-loaded.

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 moderate-complexity tool with five params, a full schema, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: scope, permission, alternative routing, and return format. It slightly under-specifies error conditions and duplicate-name handling, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all five parameters including defaults and constraints. The description reinforces the 'type' enum values (text, voice, category) but adds no new parameter-level information, which aligns with the baseline-3 rule for high schema coverage.

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 + resource ('Create a text channel, voice channel, or category in a server') and clearly enumerates the supported channel types, which separates it from the generic title 'Create channel'. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from discord_create_forum_channel by name, so an agent can disambiguate without opening any schema.

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 gives an explicit prerequisite ('Requires the Manage Channels permission'), an explicit exclusion ('For forum channels use discord_create_forum_channel instead'), and names the exact alternative tool. This covers when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the alternative all in one sentence.

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