discord_mod_remove_permissions

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action without detailing behavioral traits such as destructiveness, permission requirements, or reversibility. The agent is left unaware of important side effects.

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 that is front-loaded with the core action and object. Every word is necessary, with zero waste.

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 simple parameters and lack of output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks behavioral details (e.g., what happens if no overrides exist, whether removal is permanent) that would make it complete 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 100%, so the schema already documents the parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 the verb 'removes', the resource 'all permission overrides', and the scope 'for a role or user on a channel or category'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like set_permissions.

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 description does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but the usage is implied by the tool name and the context of sibling tools (e.g., set_permissions). No alternatives are mentioned.

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