get_pinned_messages

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it essentially restates the tool name and provides no additional context about required permissions, rate limits, return format, or ordering of results. This is a minimal rephrasing rather than meaningful transparency.

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, clear sentence in Japanese that front-loads the action and resource. It is appropriately sized with no redundant words.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema. The description adequately states the action but does not specify the return structure or note any dependencies on existing context (e.g., requiring access to the channel). For a straightforward list retrieval, this is marginally adequate but not fully complete.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameter (channelId) with a description identical in meaning to the tool description. The description adds no further semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb '取得する' (retrieve) and explicitly names the resource: a list of pinned messages for a specific Discord channel. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_channel_messages, which retrieve regular messages.

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 use when needing pinned messages for a channel but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives such as get_channel_messages. No exclusions are given, but the context is clear.

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