Discord Decision MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral trait: '삭제된 메시지는 복구할 수 없습니다' (deleted messages cannot be recovered), which is essential for a destructive operation. However, it doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or error conditions, leaving some gaps.

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 two sentences with zero waste: the first states the purpose, and the second provides a critical warning. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every sentence earning its place by adding essential information.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive bulk operation), no annotations, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is fairly complete. It covers the irreversible nature of deletion, but could improve by addressing permissions or error handling. The output schema reduces the need to explain returns.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no extra context on channel_id or message_ids). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('일괄 삭제한다' - bulk delete) and resource ('Discord에서 여러 메시지' - multiple messages in Discord). It distinguishes from sibling 'discord_delete_message' (singular) by specifying bulk deletion, making the purpose specific and 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'discord_delete_message' (for single messages) or 'discord_clear_inbox' (which might clear messages differently). It lacks explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives, offering only basic functional context.

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