Create a channel

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 fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as permissions required, idempotency, default visibility, whether the channel is immediately available, or what the response contains. It merely restates parameter values already in the schema.

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 very short, with three sentences or fragments. It front-loads the main action and lists key parameters. However, the visibility sentence is a fragment and 'the board itself' may confuse users by suggesting a different entity than a channel. Still, it is concise and not padded.

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 create tool with 3 parameters, the description covers purpose, visibility, and description format. It does not explain return values, errors, default visibility, or whether the operation can be undone. Given no annotations and no output schema, more behavioral context would be expected.

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 coverage is only 33% (title has no description), so the description is expected to compensate. It mentions visibility enum values and that description supports Markdown, but both are already encoded in the schema. The required parameter 'title' is not explained at all. No additional semantic value is provided beyond schema.

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 creates a channel, with the verb 'Create' and resource 'channel'. It is distinct from sibling tools like arena_update_channel and arena_get_channel, though it does not explicitly mention them. The visibility and description details are extra but not necessary for purpose.

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?

Usage context is implied: use when you want to create a channel. No explicit comparison to sibling tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description does not clarify when one should prefer this over arena_update_channel or similarly named tools.

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