discord_delete_forum_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Deletes' implies a destructive operation, the description doesn't specify whether this action is reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects related content (like replies), or what happens after deletion. The optional 'reason' parameter hints at audit logging but this isn't explicitly explained. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that efficiently communicates the core action and mentions the optional parameter. There's no wasted language, and the information is front-loaded with the primary purpose stated first. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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 destructive operation with 2 parameters (0% schema coverage), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address important contextual questions: what permissions are needed, whether deletion is permanent, what happens to replies in a thread, what format threadId should be, or what the response looks like. The description provides only basic operational information without the necessary context for safe and correct usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for both parameters, the description must compensate but provides minimal help. It mentions 'threadId' implicitly through 'forum post or thread' and notes 'optional reason', but doesn't explain what threadId represents (forum thread ID), its format, where to find it, or what the reason is used for. The description adds some meaning but doesn't adequately compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 ('Deletes') and resource ('a forum post or thread'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling deletion tools like discord_delete_category or discord_delete_message, which would require specifying it's specifically for forum posts/threads rather than other Discord entities.

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. With multiple deletion tools available (delete_category, delete_channel, delete_message, delete_webhook), there's no indication that this is specifically for forum posts/threads versus other Discord content. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, permissions needed, or when this tool would be appropriate versus other deletion methods.

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