list_channels

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only says 'list all channels'. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, pagination, or what data fields are returned. The agent gains minimal insight beyond the tool's name.

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 concise sentence that directly states the purpose. It is front-loaded and not verbose, though it could benefit from a bit more context without becoming bulky.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally informative. It does not explain what channel properties are listed, ordering, or any prerequisites. For a simple list tool, more detail on return format would improve completeness.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter info, but with zero parameters, the baseline is 4. It does not need to compensate for any gaps.

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 'List all channels on the server' clearly specifies the action (list) and the resource (channels), distinguishing it from siblings like 'channel_info' (details on a specific channel) and 'find_channels' (search/filter).

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 states the tool's function but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'find_channels' or 'channel_info'. It implicitly suggests use when all channels are needed, but lacks explicit when-not or alternative mentions.

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