channel_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add the useful ordering behavior ('newest first'), but it does not mention what a search returns, how pagination works, whether access restrictions apply, or any side effects. For a no-annotation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 a single focused sentence with no filler. The core scope is front-loaded, and the ordering behavior is stated efficiently. It is concise without being merely a tautology.

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?

Although the schema thoroughly documents parameters, the description offers no output format information, no usage context relative to sibling tools, and no behavioral details beyond ordering. For a 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition is too thin to fully guide correct invocation.

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 100%, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents every parameter and its constraints.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('one channel's or thread's messages'), and also conveys the sort order ('newest first'). It is clear about scope, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like channel_messages or dm_search.

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 phrase 'one channel's or thread's messages' implies the tool is for scoped message search rather than guild-wide or DM search, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or named alternatives. Usage must be inferred from the wording and sibling names.

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