discord_prune_members

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds critical behavioral context: removal is irreversible, requires 'Kick Members' permission, and the dry_run default behavior (safe by default). 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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, safety mechanism, and consequences/permissions. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

No output schema, but the description hints at return count ('preview the count'). It covers key aspects: safety, permissions, irreversibility. Could be slightly more explicit about the return format, but overall sufficient given the tool's destructive nature.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds little beyond explaining the dry_run default and that roles are optional. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the weight.

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 'Remove members who have been inactive (no roles, not seen) for a number of days,' providing a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like discord_kick_member or discord_ban_member, which are immediate removals, by focusing on inactivity pruning.

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 usage context: pruning inactive members. It includes safety guidance, advising a dry_run first to preview. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives (e.g., kick, ban) or state when not to use this tool, missing an opportunity for fuller guidance.

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