Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• discord_executeC
  2.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions executing operations and referencing a schema, but fails to describe critical traits such as required permissions, rate limits, side effects (e.g., whether it's read-only or mutative), or error handling. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with a clear opening sentence followed by brief parameter explanations. It avoids unnecessary verbosity, though the 'get schema first' note could be more integrated. Overall, it is efficient with minimal waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity (2 parameters with nested objects, no annotations, but an output schema exists), the description is moderately complete. It covers basic purpose and parameter hints, and the presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values. However, it lacks sufficient detail on behavior and usage, making it adequate but with clear gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds some meaning by explaining 'operation' as an identifier with examples and 'params' as operation parameters with a note to 'get schema first,' but this is insufficient for two parameters with nested objects and no schema details. The description does not fully clarify parameter usage or constraints.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose2/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states the tool 'Execute[s] a Discord operation with specified parameters,' which is a tautology of the tool name 'discord_execute' and provides minimal specificity. It mentions operation identifiers like 'messages.send' or 'members.list' but does not clearly distinguish what this tool does versus its siblings (e.g., discord_discover, discord_get_schema), leaving the purpose vague.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention to 'get schema first' for params implies a prerequisite but does not specify when to choose discord_execute over discord_discover or discord_get_schema, nor does it provide context for its application, resulting in minimal usage direction.

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

• discord_discoverB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'browses' operations, implying a read-only action, but doesn't clarify if it's safe, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the browsing entails. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence: 'Browse all available Discord operations organized by category.' It is front-loaded with the core purpose, has zero waste, and is appropriately sized for a simple tool. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or output interpretation. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but more context could help the agent understand when and how to use this tool effectively.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately doesn't mention any. A baseline score of 4 is applied since no parameters exist, and the description doesn't introduce confusion.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Browse all available Discord operations organized by category.' It specifies the verb ('browse') and resource ('Discord operations'), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like discord_execute or discord_get_schema. The purpose is clear but lacks sibling distinction.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose discord_discover over discord_execute or discord_get_schema, nor does it provide context about prerequisites or typical use cases. This leaves the agent without explicit usage instructions.

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

• discord_get_schemaA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool does but doesn't cover key aspects like whether it's a read-only operation, potential rate limits, error handling, or the format of the output (though output schema exists). This leaves gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence clearly states the purpose, followed by a structured 'Args' section with bullet points. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is largely complete. It covers the purpose and parameter semantics adequately. However, it could improve by addressing behavioral aspects like read-only nature or error cases, which are not fully covered by the output schema alone.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that the 'operation' parameter is an identifier and provides concrete examples (e.g., 'messages.send', 'batch.category.action'), clarifying its semantics. This compensates well for the schema's lack of details, though it doesn't cover all possible edge cases or formats.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get detailed parameter schema for a specific operation.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('parameter schema'), making it understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'discord_discover' or 'discord_execute', which might also involve schema-related operations, preventing a perfect score.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage by mentioning 'specific operation' and providing examples of operation identifiers, suggesting it should be used when schema details are needed. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'discord_discover' (which might list operations) or 'discord_execute' (which might use the schema), leaving the context somewhat vague.

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