discord_delete_channel

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description earns credit for additive context: it discloses the cascade effect ('every message in it'), irreversibility, the required permission (Manage Channels), and a confirmation requirement. It stops short of 5 only because 'Irreversible' partially echoes the destructive annotation.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences: action, irreversibility, prerequisite/confirmation, and return. Zero filler and every sentence carries operational weight.

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 single-target mutation with full annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs: what is destroyed, irreversibility, permission, and confirmation. Return-value detail is safely delegated to the output schema.

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% – channel_id documents the pattern and irreversibility, and reason documents its audit-log purpose. The description adds nothing about parameter usage, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Permanently delete a channel or thread') and clarifies scope with 'every message in it', which sharply distinguishes it from siblings like discord_delete_message or discord_delete_role. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit pre-call guidance ('Confirm with the user before calling') and a permission prerequisite ('Needs Manage Channels'), which is clear context for when the tool is appropriate. It does not name alternative tools (e.g., discord_edit_channel) for non-destructive edits, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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