discord_get_ban

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention any behavioral traits such as required permissions (e.g., 'Ban Members' permission), what happens if the user is not banned, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is a significant gap for a tool that reads potentially sensitive moderation data.

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 a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it could be slightly expanded to include parameter guidance without losing conciseness, hence a 4 rather than 5.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and simple input schema, the description should provide more context. It does not describe the return value (what fields a ban entry contains), any prerequisites, or how errors are handled (e.g., ban not found). This incomplete context may lead to incorrect tool usage.

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?

The input schema has 2 parameters ('userId', 'guildId') with zero description coverage (0%). The description does not explain the meaning or role of these parameters. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description should clarify that 'guildId' identifies the Discord server and 'userId' the banned user, which it fails to do.

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 'Get a single ban entry' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('ban entry'), clearly indicating it retrieves a single ban. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'discord_list_bans' (lists all bans) and 'discord_ban_user' (creates a ban), fulfilling the purpose clarity dimension well.

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 any prerequisites, exclusions, or compare it to siblings such as 'discord_list_bans' or 'discord_unban_user'. An agent would have to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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