Create Discord AutoMod rule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not explain what an AutoMod rule does once created, that it takes effect immediately on the guild, whether a 'confirm' flag gates the write, or any rate-limit/permission context. The unexplained 'confirm' parameter in particular is a behavioral detail only prose could supply.

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 11-word sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the action verb and resource. It wastes nothing, but the terseness is a symptom of thin content rather than a model of disciplined structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but for an 11-parameter, deeply nested mutation tool with zero schema descriptions the one-line description is far too thin. It omits permission requirements, triggerType/eventType semantics, the confirm flag, and the relationship between triggerType and triggerMetadata — all things an agent cannot derive from an undescribed schema.

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% across 11 parameters (5 required), including nested triggerMetadata and actions objects, and the description only gestures at 'trigger metadata and actions'. Critical fields — guildId, name, eventType, triggerType, enabled, confirm, exemptRoleIds/exemptChannelIds — get no meaning, no valid-value hints (eventType/triggerType are untyped string|number unions with no enum), and no guidance on how triggerType constrains which triggerMetadata fields are valid.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Create a Discord AutoMod rule') and hints at the two core payload areas ('JSON trigger metadata and actions'), so an agent can tell it apart from discord_update_automod_rule / discord_delete_automod_rule / discord_list_automod_rules by the create verb. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. the MANAGE_GUILD permission AutoMod requires), and no note about checking existing rules first via discord_list_automod_rules. An agent must infer everything about timing and eligibility 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.