afl_broadcast_channels

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

No annotations exist, so the description must compensate. It reveals the return structure and pagination via 'pageInfo', but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The mention of '272' channels is a minor behavioral hint.

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 extremely concise, with two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and return structure. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the simple pagination parameters and lack of output schema, the description partially covers the tool's behavior by including the return structure. However, it omits parameter semantics and usage guidelines, leaving gaps for an AI agent to fully leverage the tool.

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 0% and the description does not mention the two parameters (page, pageSize). The agent gets no guidance on how to use pagination or what values are appropriate, forcing reliance on the schema alone.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'broadcast channels', along with a note on the number of channels and media types. It distinctly separates this tool from siblings like 'afl_broadcasters_list' by focusing on channels.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives is provided. The description does not mention exclusions or contexts, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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