discord_edit_webhook_message

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-ended tool. The description adds that editing 'replaces the provided fields' and 'returns a confirmation', which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not contradict 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loading the core action and immediately adding key requirements and return. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main behavior (edit, replace fields, require token, return confirmation). It lacks error handling or rate limit notes, but the annotations' openWorldHint suggests flexibility. Overall adequate.

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?

All parameters have full schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal new information beyond the schema. It reinforces the need for a token but does not elaborate on parameter constraints or usage.

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 message previously sent through a webhook', specifying the verb (edit), resource (message), and context (webhook). This distinguishes it from siblings like discord_edit_message (regular messages) and discord_delete_webhook_message (delete).

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires the original webhook token') and implies the tool is for webhook messages, differentiating from regular message editing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives.

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