discord_get_audit_log

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the permission requirement ('Requires View Audit Log permission'), which is a key behavioral trait for access control. However, it lacks details on rate limits, pagination behavior (beyond the 'before' parameter in schema), error handling, or what the response looks like (since no output schema exists). This leaves gaps in transparency for a read operation.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose ('Fetch recent audit log entries'), followed by filtering details and permission requirement in just two sentences. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, making it appropriately sized and efficient.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but has gaps. It covers the purpose, filtering, and permission needs, but lacks details on return values, error cases, or behavioral constraints like rate limits. For a tool with moderate complexity and no structured output, more context would improve completeness.

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 description adds meaningful context beyond the input schema by explaining that filtering can be done by 'action_type (Discord AuditLogEvent enum integer) and/or user_id,' which clarifies the purpose of those parameters. With schema description coverage at 80%, the schema already documents most parameters well, but the description enhances understanding of filtering semantics, compensating slightly for the coverage gap.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('recent audit log entries'), and mentions filtering capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'discord_get_guild' or 'discord_get_member' which might also retrieve guild-related information, though audit logs are distinct.

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 some context by stating 'Requires View Audit Log permission,' which implies when to use it (when that permission is available). However, it doesn't offer explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'discord_get_guild' for general guild info or other audit-related tools (none exist in siblings), leaving usage somewhat implied rather than clearly defined.

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