Ses kanallarını listele

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful scope by saying it covers only servers and channels the bot can access, but it does not discuss return format, pagination, or permission requirements.

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 sentences, with the action stated first and the usage condition second. No redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple read-only listing tool with one fully documented parameter and an annotation covering safety, the description gives enough context to invoke it correctly. Return-value details are not needed because no output schema 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?

The single guild parameter has 100% schema description coverage, including name-or-ID semantics, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description does not mention the parameter or add any filtering details beyond the schema.

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?

Specifies a clear verb and resource: listing all Discord servers and voice channels the bot can access. This is immediately distinguishable from the music-focused sibling tools such as search_songs and play_song.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it: when the user mentions a channel and it is unclear which one. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but no sibling tool performs this channel-listing role.

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