convert_to_discord

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

Annotations declare idempotent/non-destructive, but description adds valuable behavioral specifics: headers become bold/underline, code blocks are preserved, and basic formatting is maintained. This disclosure of specific transformation logic is exactly the context annotations cannot provide. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: purpose statement, specific transformation detail, preservation guarantee. Every sentence earns its place. Well front-loaded with the core action in sentence one.

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?

Appropriate for a format-conversion tool with 2 parameters and no output schema. Covers input expectations and transformation behavior. Missing only documentation of the return value duality (file vs. string) which is a significant behavioral gap given the output_path parameter exists.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description implicitly reinforces the 'markdown' parameter by mentioning GFM features (tables, headers) but does not explicitly walk through parameters or add syntax guidance beyond the schema. Notably omits mention of the output_path parameter's dual-behavior (file write vs. string return).

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?

Clearly states the verb (Convert), source (Markdown), and target format (Discord-compatible). The mention of 'headers to styled bold/underline' specifically signals Discord's limitations, distinguishing it from siblings like convert_to_html or convert_to_slack. Could be 5 if it explicitly contrasted with the many other conversion tools available.

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?

Provides implicit usage guidance by specifying 'renders correctly in Discord messages,' which signals when to select this over other converters. However, lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or sibling comparisons despite having 20+ conversion alternatives. Does not clarify when to use output_path vs. receiving direct string output.

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