format_discord_mention

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It never states that this is a pure, side-effect-free string formatter (no API calls, no state change), nor what the output looks like. It also omits the 'special_tab' type supported by the schema, so the behavioral surface described is incomplete.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the supported target kinds are listed up front. It is efficient, though it could have used the remaining space to add routing or output-format 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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the return value (the generated markdown string) and clarify the inverse relationship with resolve_discord_mentions. It covers the input types adequately but leaves the output and routing unspecified.

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%, and the enum values for 'type' and 'style' are already fully documented in the schema (including timestamp style meanings). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('Discord Markdown mentions and shortcuts') and enumerates the supported target kinds. It is clear on its own, but it does not distinguish itself from the closely related sibling resolve_discord_mentions (the inverse operation) or get_discord_syntax_guide.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings like resolve_discord_mentions, get_discord_symbols, search_discord_symbols, and get_discord_syntax_guide, the agent gets no routing guidance at all, leaving the choice to inference from the name.

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