discord_delete_emoji

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=false, but the description goes well beyond them: it explains the concrete blast radius (image gone, every :name: reference renders as unknown), the required permission, the managed-emoji rejection path, and the return value. That is precisely the context an agent cannot derive from hints.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the irreversibility warning before permissions and edge cases. No filler and no repetition of the title or annotation flags.

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?

For a destructive 3-parameter mutation, everything an agent needs to call it safely is present: permission gate, managed-emoji failure mode, irreversibility, and outcome. An output schema exists, so the brief mention of the returned name is sufficient rather than required.

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 emoji_id, guild_id, and the audit-log reason are fully documented in structured data; the description adds no parameter-level detail. Baseline 3 applies since the schema is already carrying that burden.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource pair ("Delete a custom emoji") that cannot be confused with siblings such as discord_edit_emoji, discord_create_emoji, or discord_delete_sticker. The scope is narrowed further to custom (non-managed) emojis, which is the exact distinction an agent needs.

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 preconditions and exclusions: requires Manage Expressions, and managed emojis created by an integration will be rejected so must not be attempted. It does not explicitly name a sibling as the alternative (e.g., discord_edit_emoji), so it stops short of a 5.

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