discord_pin_message

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the dedicated permission requirement (critical for authorization), the channel pin limit, and idempotency detail. No contradictions.

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, with no wasted words. The first sentence clearly states the action and controlling parameter; the second sentence adds essential constraints and behavior. Every sentence is necessary and informative.

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 simplicity (3 required parameters, no output schema, no nested objects) and the existing annotations, the description covers all critical aspects: purpose, permission, limits, and idempotency. It is complete for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The description adds no new information about parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Per guidelines, baseline is 3 for high coverage, and no extra parameter semantics are given.

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 explicitly states 'Pin or unpin a message in a channel, controlled by the pin flag,' specifying the verb (pin/unpin), resource (message in channel), and control parameter. Among many sibling tools, it uniquely describes this specific action, clearly distinguishing it from fetch_pinned_messages or other operations.

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 provides explicit usage conditions: requires the 'Pin Messages permission,' notes the channel limit of 50 pins, and states idempotency. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use alternatives, the context with siblings makes it clear; it gives sufficient guidance for correct invocation.

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