Create channel

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a mutation. The description adds that it creates channels (non-destructive in the sense of not deleting), does not set permissions, and supports dry_run preview. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the core action and types. Every sentence adds value.

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 creation tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, types, category, dry_run, and permissions delegation. However, it does not describe the return value or confirmation, which would be useful but is not critical.

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 high (88%), so the schema already describes most parameters. The description adds context about permission overwrites being delegated, but does not provide significant additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 'create' and resource 'channel', lists all channel types (text, voice, forum, stage, announcement, category), and mentions optional category placement. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clone_channel or update_channel.

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 explicitly notes that permission overwrites are handled by other tools ('in a later phase'), and mentions dry_run support. It provides context on when not to set permissions, but does not directly compare to alternative creation tools like clone_channel.

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