discord_edit_role

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine behavioral trait not in the annotations — partial-update semantics ('only passed fields change') — plus a return confirmation, but says nothing about required permissions or the risk of granting a permissions bitfield.

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?

Two tight sentences with the mutable-field list front-loaded and the partial-update rule immediately after. The 'Returns:' line is mildly redundant given an output schema exists, but it is short and costs little.

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 mutation tool with 8 parameters, the description covers the field set and patch behavior adequately, and the output schema means returns need not be detailed. It omits authorization requirements and the consequence of overwriting a role's permission bitfield, which an agent should know before calling.

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 only 50%, and the description usefully names exactly the undocumented fields (name, hoist, mentionable) alongside color and permissions, compensating for the gap. It still does not explain semantics such as what 'hoist' does or the permission bitfield encoding, which the schema handles only for permissions.

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 ('Change') and resource ('a role') and enumerates the mutable fields, so an agent can distinguish it from discord_create_role, discord_delete_role, and discord_list_roles without opening the schema. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or exclusion, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

'Only passed fields change' implies a patch-style update against an existing role, which is usable context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites such as needing Manage Roles, and no comparison against alternatives like discord_set_member_role.

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