discord_admin_members

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

The description mentions 'administer' and lists 'kicks, and bans', which implies destructive capabilities, aligning with the destructiveHint annotation. However, it adds little beyond the annotations; it does not disclose specifics like whether timeouts require a body, whether bans are reversible, or how the operation affects existing member state. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 front-loads the main purpose ('Inspect or administer members') and then lists the key areas. It is efficient with no redundant wording, though the list format is slightly dense.

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 is a complex tool with 8 parameters, a 10-value operation enum, and no output schema. The description is extremely brief and does not explain how to choose an operation, what the 'data' payload should contain, how pagination works, or what responses look like. Given the tool's breadth, the description is insufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly without additional guidance.

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 only 25% (only 'data' and 'reason' have descriptions). The description does not compensate for the other parameters such as 'after', 'limit', 'search', 'userId', and 'roleId'. While parameter names and the operation enum convey some meaning, the description adds no additional semantic detail for these parameters, leaving a significant 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 states a clear resource (members) and enumerates related actions (roles, timeouts, voice state, kicks, bans). It is sufficiently specific to indicate this tool handles member administration, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling tool discord_admin_roles. The verb 'inspect or administer' is somewhat broad, but the list of resources narrows the scope.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as discord_admin_roles for role-specific tasks or discord_admin_server for server-wide configuration. No exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool references are mentioned.

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