list_stickers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only enumeration and scopes results to the server, but says nothing about pagination, permissions, whether global/Nitro stickers are included, or rate limits. Minimal behavioral disclosure for a list tool.

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 zero wasted words. The scope qualifier is placed where it matters and nothing is padded.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but thin. It omits return characteristics (pagination, sticker fields) and whether the listing spans global stickers, leaving meaningful gaps an agent would want covered.

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 guildId and its default to DISCORD_GUILD_ID are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (List) and resource (custom stickers) with scope (available on the server), which is clear enough to act on. However, it does not distinguish this from siblings like get_sticker_details or list_emojis, so the agent gets no help differentiating.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. The agent is not told when to reach for list_stickers versus get_sticker_details, nor any prerequisite or context for the listing operation.

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