discord_set_welcome_screen

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), so the bar is lower, yet the description adds substantial context: required permission scope, the COMMUNITY feature gate, the non-empty-description/at-least-one-channel invariant, and that the channel list is replaced wholesale rather than merged. These are exactly the failure modes an agent needs before calling.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose then requirements then limitation then return value. No filler; the LIMITATION label makes the highest-risk constraint scannable.

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 mutation tool with permission gates and structural invariants, the description covers prerequisites, validation rules, replacement semantics, and return behavior. An output schema exists, and the description still notes it returns the resulting screen, so nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns extra by explaining update semantics the schema only hints at — the channel list "Replaces the existing list" wholesale when provided, implying other fields may be left untouched. It also maps the four params to their purpose (enable/disable, headline description, per-channel blurb).

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+resource pair ("Configure the server's welcome screen") and enumerates the three configurable aspects (enable state, headline, recommended channels). This clearly distinguishes it from the read-only sibling discord_get_welcome_screen without needing the 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?

States the prerequisites explicitly (COMMUNITY feature, Manage Server permission) and the validation constraints that must hold when enabling, which tells the agent when the call will fail. It does not name the alternative read tool (discord_get_welcome_screen) for inspecting current state, but the set-vs-get distinction is unambiguous from the name.

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