superchat_list_channels

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: each call returns only one page, and after/before cursors are needed to continue pagination. This helps the agent understand the tool's paging behavior without relying solely on annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core behavior, then adds channel examples, the downstream use of channel_id, and pagination guidance. Every sentence contributes useful information with no unnecessary 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 simple, read-only list tool with three optional parameters and rich schema descriptions, the description is complete. It covers scope, output relevance (channel_id), and pagination behavior, leaving no critical ambiguity for an agent deciding to call it.

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 input schema already provides thorough descriptions for all three parameters, including cursor usage and the limit range, so schema coverage is 100%. The description reinforces the pagination concept but does not meaningfully extend the parameter documentation.

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 identifies the action and resource: 'List one page of connected channels in this workspace.' It also provides concrete examples of channel types (WhatsApp, Instagram Direct, etc.) and notes that returned channel_ids are used for sending, which makes the tool's role unambiguous relative to sibling list tools.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to obtain connected channels and channel_ids for sending. It also explains how to use pagination cursors. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the intended usage is clear from the description.

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