discord_get_guild_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description is consistent ('Read-only'), so no contradiction. It adds useful context beyond annotations: single-call completeness and the pre-mutation snapshot role. It stops short of noting permissions needed or response shape, which the output schema partly covers anyway.

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?

The core intent and the read-only/workflow guidance are front-loaded, and the field enumeration earns its length by defining coverage. The middle enumeration is dense and could be trimmed, but it is functional rather than 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?

With an output schema, full param coverage, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: complete field scope and the sequencing relative to discord_set_* tools. No material gap remains.

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 guild_id with a snowflake pattern and 100% schema description coverage, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds nothing parameter-specific but nothing is missing; baseline 4 applies for a fully documented one-param schema.

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 and scope ('Read every server-level setting in one call') and then enumerates the concrete fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what resource surface this covers. It is distinguishable from narrower reads like discord_get_guild_info or discord_get_guild_features by the exhaustive field list.

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?

Explicitly states the workflow: 'Use this before any change so you know the current values,' and names the alternative tool family ('targeted discord_set_* tools') for mutation. That is a clear when-to-use plus a named alternative, which is what this dimension rewards.

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