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

The annotations already flag this as non-read-only and destructive, and the description adds important context beyond them: start produces a URL and OAuth should not be completed by the agent, while disconnect removes the connection and should be used only on user request. It does not describe permissions, reversibility, or error behavior, but the key action semantics are well disclosed.

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 short, front-loaded, and each sentence carries useful operational meaning. It moves directly from resource identification to action behavior, cautions, and the state-check alternative without filler.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and existing destructive annotations, the description covers the critical action behavior, OAuth caveat, disconnect caution, and state alternative. The main missing piece is an explanation of the required slug parameter.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains the action parameter by describing start and disconnect behavior, including the critical OAuth caveat, but it never explains what slug refers to.

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 identifies the resource as a Slack connection for a status page and explains the two action behaviors: start returns a URL and disconnect removes the connection. It also distinguishes state lookup by pointing to get_status_page, though the opening phrase is noun-like rather than a direct verb statement.

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?

It gives explicit usage conditions: action start returns a URL and the agent should not complete OAuth; action disconnect should only be used when the user asked. It also names get_status_page as the place to check connection state, which is a clear alternative for a related need.

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