チャンネル一覧

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description adds that it returns receivable channels and that the output can feed into set_channel. It does not disclose return shape, ordering, or how includeSkipped affects results, but the annotation lowers the bar for behavioral disclosure.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and filtering capability. The second sentence about set_channel adds useful downstream context, though it is slightly tangential to the tool's own invocation.

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 read-only listing tool with fully documented optional parameters, the description is adequate. It lacks an explicit description of the return format and does not mention query or includeSkipped, but those are covered in the schema and the readOnlyHint annotation covers safety.

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%, so the schema documents type, query, device, and includeSkipped. The description adds broadcast type examples, but these largely duplicate the schema's own examples and do not compensate for missing context on the other parameters.

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 returns a list of receivable channels and that the type parameter filters by broadcast type, with concrete examples. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_current_channel or get_program_guide, though the word '一覧' implies enumeration.

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 implies this tool is for listing and filtering channels and notes set_channel can accept identifiers from the list. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as get_current_channel or get_program_guide, nor mention exclusions.

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