discord_follow_announcement

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'follow' but does not specify side effects (e.g., creates a channel follower relationship), permissions required, or whether the action is reversible. This omission leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, 7 words). While brevity is valued, it comes at the cost of necessary detail. The structure is straightforward but under-informative for a tool that likely requires specific permissions and context.

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 has two required parameters, no output schema, and simple action, the description should provide enough context for correct invocation. It fails to mention important aspects like permission requirements (e.g., 'Manage Webhook' or 'Manage Channels'), scope (guild-level?), and whether the action is idempotent. The description is incomplete for practical use.

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 only 50% (channelId has a description). The description maps channelId as 'announcement channel' and targetChannelId as 'target channel', adding partial context beyond the schema. However, it still lacks clarity on the nature of the 'target channel' (e.g., a text channel in the same guild?) and any constraints.

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 action ('follow') and the resources ('announcement channel into a target channel'). It is specific and conveys the primary purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar tools like discord_crosspost_message.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, permissions, or exclusion of other approaches. The user is left to infer usage context from the name alone.

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