discord_leave_guild

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, but the description adds consequences the annotations cannot convey: membership ends immediately, rejoining requires a fresh invite URL with bot scopes, no special bot permissions are needed, and the user must approve the exact change first. These are exactly the behavioral facts an agent needs before committing to an irreversible call.

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 action and its scope are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed in order by consequences, routing guidance, return value, permissions, and the approval prompt. Every sentence supplies information an agent would otherwise have to guess, and none repeats the title or schema verbatim.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers everything material: who acts, what is lost, how to undo (new invite), the sibling boundary, permission requirements, and the approval gate. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100% and the single guild_id parameter is documented with a digit-only pattern, so the schema carries the load. The description only restates that identification is "by server ID," adding no format or sourcing guidance beyond the schema, which is the baseline for a fully-covered schema.

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?

"Remove the authenticated bot from a guild by server ID" gives a specific verb, the exact actor (the authenticated bot, not a human member), and the resource, so there is no ambiguity about who is being removed. It further distinguishes itself from discord_delete_guild_member, which handles kicking other members.

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 states a positive trigger ("Use this when the bot is instructed to depart a server") and names the concrete alternative with its condition ("to kick another member use discord_delete_guild_member"). Both the when-to-use and the when-not-to-use case are covered explicitly.

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