timeout_member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., automatic unmuting after duration), required permissions (e.g., moderate_members), or whether the action is reversible. This is a significant gap for a moderation tool.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks structure. It could benefit from bullet points or separate sections for parameters, permissions, and effects. However, it is not verbose.

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 of a member timeout action (with no annotations or output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the timeout mechanism, duration format, or potential outcomes. The agent would need to infer crucial details.

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 50% (duration_minutes and reason have descriptions). The description does not add any parameter information beyond what the schema provides. For the undocumented guild_id and user_id, the tool name and context imply their meaning, but the description could clarify. Baseline 3 is appropriate given partial schema coverage.

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 'timeout' (or mute) and the resource 'member', distinguishing it from sibling actions like ban_member (permanent ban) or kick_member (immediate removal). The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ban, kick, role restrictions). No mention of prerequisites like permissions or guild membership. The description leaves the agent to infer context.

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