discord_edit_webhook

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: the Manage Webhooks permission requirement and the fact that it returns a confirmation. The annotations already signal a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, and the description aligns with them—no contradiction.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what the tool updates, partial-update semantics, and permission/return details. Information is front-loaded and there is no redundant wording.

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 simple 4-parameter edit tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, partial update behavior, permission, and response. It could be more specific about the confirmation's shape, but nothing essential is missing for invocation.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that only provided fields change, which is essential for understanding how to use parameters in combination. It does not restate schema details like max length or patterns.

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 specific verb ('Update'), a specific resource ('a webhook'), and enumerates the editable fields ('name, avatar, or the channel it posts to'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like discord_edit_webhook_message (which edits a message sent by a webhook) and discord_delete_webhook.

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 identifies what the tool does and the partial-update behavior ('Only provided fields change'), so an agent knows it can pass a subset of fields. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the context is clear enough for this straightforward edit operation.

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