Discord MCP Server

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.