discord_get_audit_log

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by stating the required permission and the return structure (entries array with specific fields). No contradictions, and it provides behavioral context beyond 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 plus a concise format note, front-loading the purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 3 parameters, 1 required, and an existing output schema (though not shown), the description covers purpose, permission, and return format. Missing details like pagination or rate limits are not critical for this simple fetch tool.

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 documents parameters well. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (e.g., limit default, action_type filter). 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 fetches the server's audit log, lists types of actions (bans, kicks, role/channel changes), and specifies it returns entries with id, action, executor, target, reason, createdAt. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform mutations or fetch other data.

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 notes the required 'View Audit Log' permission and declares read-only nature, providing clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the read-only hint and sibling names imply this is for log retrieval only.

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