discord_set_guild_channels

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

Annotations only declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, openWorld=true, destructive=false; the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts — partial-update semantics, a feature-gated failure mode, per-slot channel-type validation, the Manage Server permission requirement, and that the resulting slot IDs are returned. That is exactly the context annotations cannot carry.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and slot list, then partial-update semantics, then constraints and return value. No filler or restatement of the title.

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 an 8-parameter mutation with an output schema, everything an agent needs is present: scope, prerequisites, per-slot validation, permission requirement, and partial-update behavior. Return handling is delegated to the output schema, which the description only briefly flags.

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 per-parameter descriptions already explain snowflake format, null-to-clear, channel-kind constraints, and the AFK timeout rounding. The description restates the slot list and the voice requirement for AFK but adds little syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already supplies, 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?

States a specific verb and resource — pointing the guild's special channel slots (AFK, system, rules, public updates, safety alerts) at concrete channels — and enumerates exactly which slots are in scope. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like discord_set_system_channel_notices or discord_enable_community without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear preconditions and exclusions: 'Only provided slots change', the COMMUNITY-feature requirement for rules/public-updates/safety-alerts with the consequence that Discord rejects them otherwise, AFK must be a voice channel, and Manage Server is required. It does not explicitly route the agent to or away from specific sibling tools, which keeps it short of a 5.

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