discord_create_webhook

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 states this is a creation operation, implying it's a write/mutation tool, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions, rate limits, whether the webhook is reusable, or what happens on success/failure. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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, clear sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence earns its place by defining the tool's function.

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 tool's complexity (a mutation operation with 4 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects, parameter details, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively in a real-world context.

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%, meaning none of the 4 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no information about parameters beyond what's inferred from the tool name (e.g., channelId and name are required). It doesn't explain what 'avatar' or 'reason' mean, their formats, or constraints, failing to compensate for the low 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 action ('creates') and resource ('new webhook for a Discord channel'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like discord_delete_webhook or discord_edit_webhook by focusing on creation. However, it doesn't specify what a webhook is or its typical use cases, which prevents 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.

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 prerequisites (e.g., needing channel access), compare it to similar tools like discord_send_webhook_message, or indicate scenarios where webhook creation is appropriate. This lack of context leaves the agent with minimal usage direction.

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