discord_list_stickers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so "Read-only" largely restates structured data. The description does add scope (custom stickers only, not default/global ones) and lists the returned attributes, which is modestly useful but partly duplicates the output schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the return-field list second and nothing extraneous.

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 single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers what is listed and that it mutates nothing. It lacks only permission or pagination context, which is a minor gap given the structured data already present.

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% and the single guild_id parameter is documented with pattern and snowflake semantics in the schema itself. The description's only contribution is the word "server's", which maps loosely to guild_id without adding format or constraints.

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 plus resource ("List the server's custom stickers") and it enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what comes back. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from discord_list_emojis or the sticker mutation siblings, but the resource noun is unambiguous.

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 server's" implies a guild context and "Read-only" implies this is the inspection counterpart to create/edit/delete_sticker, but no alternative is named and no condition or prerequisite (e.g. needs Manage Emojis permission) is stated. Usage is inferable rather than explained.

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