get_servers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does communicate scope by limiting results to servers the bot is a member of, and 'List' implies a read-only operation, but it does not address return format, pagination, rate limits, or potential side effects. This is adequate but minimal.

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, tight sentence with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is nearly complete: it names the resource, the scope, and the operation. It could mention what the returned server objects contain, but that omission does not block correct invocation for a simple list-all tool.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema documents 100% coverage by declaring an empty properties object. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4 because there is no parameter-level meaning for the description to add.

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 is specific and unambiguous: it names the exact action ('List all') and the exact resource ('Discord servers (guilds) the bot is a member of'). It is clearly distinct from siblings like get_messages, get_channels, and get_dms, which operate on different Discord entities.

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 what the tool does but gives no explicit guidance about when to choose it over alternatives, nor any conditions for use. Sibling tools are not mentioned, and there are no exclusions or contextual hints beyond the resource itself.

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