Skip to main content
Glama

slack_post_message_draft

Draft a message to a Slack channel. Does NOT post without explicit user approval.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "channel": "<channel>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "slack_post_message_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
channelYesTarget channel name or ID (e.g. "#general", "#engineering").
messageYesMessage body or announcement content.
thread_tsNoOptional parent thread timestamp for threaded replies.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry behavioral context. It clearly discloses the most important behavior: the tool drafts but does not post without explicit user approval, which is useful safety information. It does not explain where the draft is stored, how approval is obtained, or what the response contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no wasted wording. It front-loads the action and immediately states the critical non-posting constraint.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter drafting tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and safety behavior. It could be more complete by clarifying draft return behavior or the approval mechanism, but the core invocation context is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at the baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: "Draft a message to a Slack channel." It also clarifies the key scope constraint that it does not post without approval, making the purpose distinct from a direct posting tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: use this to compose a Slack message draft, and it will not post without explicit approval. It does not name an alternative sibling or spell out when-not-to-use beyond the approval condition, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.