ban_member

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

Without annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Ban a user from the server' without mentioning required permissions, audit logging, the permanence of the ban, or the effect of optional parameters like delete_message_days. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the implications.

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?

At one sentence, the description is too terse. It omits critical context and is not front-loaded with the most important usage details. Brevity here results in under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, and the presence of 4 parameters including important optional ones, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain return values, permission requirements, or the consequences of the action (e.g., ban is permanent until unbanned). This is insufficient for an agent to reliably use the tool.

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?

The description adds no information about parameters beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 50% (two parameters have descriptions), but guild_id and user_id lack descriptions. The tool description does not compensate for this gap, leaving ambiguity about how to specify the user and guild.

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 action (ban) and target (user from server). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like kick_member or timeout_member, which also involve removing or restricting users.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kick_member, timeout_member, or unban_member. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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