Ban member

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly identifies the tool as destructive (banning) and optionally deleting messages, but it does not disclose reversibility (via unban_member) or permissions needed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every word contributes value.

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 straightforward ban action, the description is largely complete. However, it could be improved by mentioning that banning is permanent and reversible via unban_member, or by noting required permissions. Without an output schema, the return value is not addressed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description only adds the phrase 'optionally deleting their recent messages,' which ties to the delete_message_days parameter but does not provide new meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'ban' and the resource 'user from the server', with the optional behavior of deleting recent messages. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kick_member and timeout_member.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like timeout_member or kick_member. Usage is implied by the name and description, but the tool does not help an agent decide between similar actions such as kick vs ban.

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