Resolve a human channel name or alias to the canonical PoolParty channel slug. PP0, Main Stage, and main resolve to "main"; PP1 resolves to "pp1". Read-only. No auth required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | Yes | Channel name, slug, or alias, e.g. "PP0", "Main Stage", "main", or "PP1". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly states the tool is read-only and requires no authentication, and explains the mapping behavior with examples. No contradictions.
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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, provides examples, notes read-only and no auth, and is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.
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 single parameter 'channel' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds example values but does not significantly extend beyond the schema's explanation. 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 clearly states the tool resolves a human channel name or alias to a canonical slug, with specific examples. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browse_channels or get_channel_feed by focusing on resolution.
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 provides clear context ('Read-only. No auth required.') and implies when to use (when needing to convert alias to slug). It doesn't explicitly state when not to use, but the purpose is well-defined.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
