discord_moderate_member

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does mention that 'Removal actions require exact confirmation,' which hints at a safety mechanism, but it fails to explain the dryRun default, the meaning of confirm, or potential side effects like message deletion. This is insufficient for a tool that can kick or ban members.

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 brief and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concise in a helpful way. It packs multiple action verbs into one sentence but omits critical details, making it feel rushed rather than efficiently structured.

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's complexity (8 parameters, nested body object, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It lacks information about how confirmation works, the effect of dryRun, the purpose of deleteMessageSeconds, and the expected return value, leaving substantial gaps for an agent.

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 0%, and the description adds virtually no parameter information. It does not explain guildId, userId, action, body, dryRun, confirm, reason, or deleteMessageSeconds. The only hint is the confirmation requirement, but without specifying which parameter facilitates that.

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 a distinct moderation purpose: 'Modify, timeout, kick, ban, or unban a guild member.' This differentiates it from sibling tools like discord_modify_guild or discord_member_roles. However, 'timeout' appears in the description but not in the action enum, causing slight ambiguity about supported actions.

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 like discord_member_roles for role modifications or discord_modify_guild for guild-level changes. The only usage hint is the generic statement about what actions are possible, with no explicit context or exclusions.

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