discord_edit_scheduled_event

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

Beyond annotations (idempotent, not destructive), the description adds crucial behavioral details: only provided fields change, status transition rules (SCHEDULED→ACTIVE→COMPLETED or SCHEDULED→CANCELED), and the required Manage Events permission. No contradiction with 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, both necessary. The first covers purpose and partial update nature; the second focuses on status transitions and permission. No wasted words.

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 is sufficient for a tool with 100% schema coverage and annotations. It explains the key behavioral aspects (partial updates, status transitions, permission). No output schema exists, so return values are not expected. Minor gaps like error handling are not critical here.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the semantics of the status field transitions and the partial update behavior, which goes beyond the individual parameter descriptions.

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 'Update a scheduled event; only provided fields change,' specifying the verb (update) and resource (scheduled event). It distinguishes from siblings like create and delete by focusing on modification.

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 clear context for using the status field to start, end, or cancel events, and notes the required permission. However, it does not explicitly exclude other use cases or mention alternatives, though the siblings imply its role as an update tool.

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