discord_get_guild_preview

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so 'Read-only' adds nothing; the real value is the disclosure that non-discoverable / non-Community servers return only a thin preview. That is exactly the kind of behavioral caveat annotations cannot express, though it doesn't say whether that manifests as an error or partial payload.

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?

Two dense sentences: payload contents first, then the availability constraint. Nothing redundant beyond the annotation-repeating 'Read-only' tail.

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 and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the one thing structured fields miss — the discoverability/Community prerequisite for a rich preview. Only the exact degraded-response behavior is left unspecified.

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?

Single required parameter with 100% schema coverage including a snowflake pattern, so the schema carries the load. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable at this coverage level.

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?

Specific verb + resource ('Fetch the public preview of a server') plus an enumeration of returned fields (member/online counts, description, icon, splash, emojis, stickers, features). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the fuller discord_get_guild_info via the 'public preview' framing, but never names that sibling, so an agent must infer the split.

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?

'Works without being a member, but Discord only serves a rich preview for servers that are discoverable or have Community enabled' gives a concrete precondition and implies the failure mode. It stops short of explicitly routing to discord_get_guild_info when richer data is needed.

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