Discord Server Setup MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the default behavior (uses current guild if no guildId specified), which is helpful. However, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the guild doesn't exist. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place. The first sentence states the core purpose and scope, while the second explains the parameter behavior. There's zero wasted language or redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (retrieving detailed guild information), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose and parameter behavior well, but lacks information about return values, error handling, and operational constraints that would be important for proper tool invocation.

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 fully documents the single optional parameter. The description adds marginal value by reinforcing that guildId is optional and clarifying the fallback behavior (uses current guild if not specified), but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Gets' and resource 'detailed information about a Discord server (guild)', specifying what information is included (channels, roles, and settings). It distinguishes from siblings like list_guilds (which lists servers) and update_server_settings (which modifies settings).

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 provides clear context for when to use it: to retrieve detailed guild information. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on retrieval rather than modification or listing. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives beyond the general sibling context.

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