list_guilds

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. The verb 'list' strongly implies a read-only, non-mutating operation, which signals safety. However, the description does not disclose any additional behavioral aspects such as rate limits, pagination, or response shape. Since the operation is inherently non-destructive and trivial, a score of 3 is fair—meeting the minimum but not going beyond.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to meaning. This is exemplary conciseness.

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 simple, parameterless list tool, the description covers the core purpose. It does not describe the return value format, but given the lack of an output schema, a brief note on what is returned might be expected. However, the tool's simplicity and the clarity of 'list all servers' make the description sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly. A small deduction for not mentioning the return structure.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description needs no parameter details. Baseline 4 is appropriate because there is nothing to explain.

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 'List all Discord servers the account is in' uses a specific verb (List) and resource (Discord servers) clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_guild_info (which targets a specific guild) or list_channels (which lists channels within a guild). There is no ambiguity about the scope.

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 implies the tool is for enumerating all servers the account belongs to. While it does not explicitly state exclusions, the context is clear: use when you need a high-level list of all guilds, not specific guild details (which get_guild_info handles). It lacks explicit 'when not to use' but the context is unambiguous for this simple operation.

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