Search Discord members

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: an environment flag and a privileged-intent gate that determine whether the call works at all. It stops short of saying what error/empty result occurs when the gate is off, or how matching behaves.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler, with the capability front-loaded and the gate condition following. Nothing here could be cut without losing information.

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 and annotations cover safety, so return values need no explanation. For a 3-parameter search tool though, the description omits match semantics, paging/limit behavior, and what happens when the privileged intent is unavailable — gaps an agent will hit at call time.

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%, so the description carries the full burden and only partially pays it: it clarifies that `query` matches username or nickname, which is useful. It says nothing about `limit` (bounds, default, whether truncation is silent), nothing about `guildId` format, and doesn't specify prefix vs substring matching, which materially changes how an agent should shape the query.

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 and resource (search guild members) plus the searchable fields (username or nickname), which is far more than the title alone. It never names the near-sibling discord_list_members, so the agent must infer the search-vs-enumerate boundary from names alone.

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?

The prerequisites (ENABLE_GUILD_MEMBERS=true and the Guild Members privileged intent) give a hard precondition for calling, which is genuine usage guidance. However, it never says when to prefer this over discord_list_members or what to do if the intent is disabled, so the when-to-use decision is only implied.

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