discord_edit_emoji

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false), the description discloses the critical hidden behavior: role_ids replaces the entire restriction list rather than appending, and an empty array opens the emoji to everyone. The permission gate and the "returns the updated emoji" outcome add further context the structured fields don't carry.

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?

Five short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by constraint, then edge-case semantics. Every sentence contributes new information; there is no restatement of the tool name or 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?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, permission requirement, partial-update behavior, the destructive edge case of role_ids replacement, and the return value. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuinely non-schema meaning: partial-update semantics (only supplied fields change) and the whole-list replacement behavior of role_ids. The name and guild/emoji identifiers are left to the schema, which is fine given its coverage.

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 opens with specific verbs and a resource ("Rename a custom emoji or change which roles may use it"), which cleanly separates it from the sibling lifecycle tools discord_create_emoji, discord_delete_emoji and discord_list_emojis. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

It gives a clear precondition ("Requires Manage Expressions") and PATCH semantics ("Only provided fields change"), which tells an agent when this call is appropriate versus a create/delete. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead for creation or deletion, so it falls one step below a 5.

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