pin_message

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

The description is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and adds that the state change works in either direction. Beyond that, it discloses no practical behavior such as permission requirements, pinning constraints, idempotency, or what effect the operation has in the channel.

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 single sentence is front-loaded, clear, and contains no wasted wording. Its brevity is efficient, although it leaves little room for useful invocation and behavioral context.

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 six-parameter mutation with no output schema, one generic sentence provides minimal overall context. The input schema makes required identifiers and dry_run discoverable, but the definition still lacks explicit pin/unpin invocation semantics and meaningful behavioral or result 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?

Although the schema documents four of the six parameters, the description adds no defaults, formats, or parameter-selection guidance. Mentioning unpinning weakly hints at the undocumented unpin flag, but it never explains that unpin=true reverses the default pinning action or clarifies the undocumented message_id field.

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 operations and resource: pinning or unpinning a message. It does not add Discord/channel context or explicitly differentiate the tool from siblings such as edit_message, so it is clear rather than fully distinctive.

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?

Usage is implied: select this tool when a message's pinned state needs to change. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, alternatives, or explicit guidance that unpinning is invoked through the unpin parameter.

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