discord_apply_automod_baseline

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: the tool is a no-op unless confirm:true (critical since readOnlyHint=false would otherwise suggest immediate writes), existing rules with the same name are skipped so re-running is safe (explaining the idempotentHint), and repeat offenders get timed out, meaning members are affected, not just config. Required permissions and the Community feature gate are also disclosed.

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?

Front-loads what the tool creates, then immediately states the preview-by-default contract in caps, followed by idempotency and prerequisites. Every sentence carries distinct operational information with no filler.

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 an output schema (so return shape needs no explanation), three simple params, and mutation semantics, the description covers everything an agent needs: what gets created, that nothing happens without confirm, that reruns are safe, and what permissions the operation requires.

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 coverage is 100%, so guild_id, confirm, and alert_channel_id are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces the confirm/preview contract but says nothing about alert_channel_id or its omission semantics, adding no parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (create) and a precisely scoped resource (a baseline set of AutoMod rules), and enumerates exactly what the baseline contains: invite-link blocking, scam/phishing keyword blocking, mention-spam blocking, and timeouts for repeat offenders. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like discord_create_automod_rule (single rule) and discord_list_automod_rules.

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?

Gives concrete conditions: use this to establish a whole baseline 'in one call', a preview is returned by default, and the caller must re-invoke with confirm:true to apply. Prerequisites (Manage Server and the Community/AutoModeration feature) and the re-run safety are stated. It does not explicitly name discord_create_automod_rule as the alternative for one-off rules, so routing to siblings is only implied by 'in one call'.

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