get_server_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it retrieves details, which indicates a read-only operation, but it does not disclose potential error behaviors (e.g., 404 if server not found), permission requirements, or rate limits. The safety profile is clear from the 'get' verb, but additional behavioral context is missing.

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 in Japanese, directly stating the purpose without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word is informative, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 single-parameter getter, the description is sufficient to understand its core functionality. However, without an output schema, it leaves what 'detailed information' includes unspecified. Given the tool's simplicity, this is acceptable but not perfect.

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% with serverId explained as 'ID of the server to retrieve detailed information for'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 '特定のDiscordサーバーの詳細情報を取得します' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (detailed information of a specific Discord server). It is distinct from sibling tools like get_server_list which focuses on the list of servers, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 details of a single server, as opposed to get_server_list for all servers, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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