discord_edit_message

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which are consistent. Description adds critical behavioral detail: Discord forbids editing non-bot messages, and it returns the edited message ID. This goes beyond the structured 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?

Description is four sentences, all relevant and front-loaded with the main action. No redundancy, but could combine the first two sentences for even tighter phrasing.

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?

Given the tool's 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it edits, ownership constraint, alternative for embeds, supported channels, and return value. It lacks mention of idempotency (though annotation indicates idempotentHint=true) but is otherwise thorough.

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%, with each parameter well-documented (e.g., message_id must be bot-authored, content max 2000 chars). The description does not add new parameter-level information beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 edits text content of a bot-sent message, distinguishes itself from discord_edit_embed for embeddings, and specifies it works in text channels and threads. The verb 'Edit' and resource 'text content of a message' are exact.

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?

Explicitly states when to use discord_edit_embed instead, and notes the constraint against editing non-bot messages. Gives context on where it works (text channels and threads), but does not comprehensively compare to all sibling tools.

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