discord_search_messages

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'searches for messages' without explaining return format, pagination behavior, or any nuances like rate limits or search syntax. This is insufficient for a tool with 14 parameters and no output schema.

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, short sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the core idea. While it lacks depth, it is highly concise and does not waste any text, meeting the standard for a concise description.

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?

This tool has 14 parameters, a required guildId, and no output schema. The description gives almost no contextual guidance on how the search operates, what results look like, or how pagination/filters work. Despite rich schema descriptions, the tool is under-specified from a usage and completion standpoint, so a 2 is appropriate.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it doesn't comment on how filters like 'content', 'authorId', or 'pinned' combine or influence the search. Thus it earns the baseline, not more.

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 action (searches) and resource (messages in a Discord server). It is specific enough about the operation, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like discord_read_messages, nor does it mention the various filtering capabilities. So it lacks the scope detail needed for a 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as discord_read_messages. The description does not indicate scenarios (e.g., searching by content, author, or filters) that favor this tool, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema's required guildId.

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