discord_get_event_subscribers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so 'Read-only' adds little. However, the description goes beyond annotations by disclosing the page size cap (up to 100), the return shape, and the exact cursor round-trip protocol, which is real operational context.

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 tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and pagination immediately after. The '{ subscribers: [...], nextCursor }' return sketch is mildly redundant given an output schema exists, but it is short enough not to be waste.

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?

With an output schema present and full parameter coverage, the main remaining risk an agent faces is pagination, and that is fully explained. Missing only secondary details such as required bot permissions or the shape of each subscriber entry, which the output schema likely covers.

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 schema already defines guild_id, event_id, after (with the snowflake pattern), and limit (1-100, default 25). The description's notes on 'after' and the 100-user page size largely restate the schema, so the 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?

The description uses a specific verb+resource+qualifier: list users who marked themselves 'Interested' in a scheduled event. That scope distinguishes it from discord_get_scheduled_event and discord_list_scheduled_events, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the pagination instruction ('if nextCursor is non-null, pass it back as after') tells the agent how to continue but not when to reach for this tool over the other scheduled-event tools. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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