List channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. Description adds that channels are grouped by category and include type/topic, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination or rate limits. It provides some value beyond annotations but not rich context.

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?

Description is very short (two sentences) with no unnecessary words. Every part serves a purpose: defining scope ('All channels... grouped by category, with type and topic') and filter capabilities. Front-loaded with key information.

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 tool's simplicity (2 optional params, no output schema), the description adequately explains the return structure (grouped channels with type and topic). It provides enough context for an agent to understand what to expect, though more detailed field descriptions could 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description lists the filter values (text, voice, etc.), which are already in the schema's enum. It does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'All channels in a server grouped by category, with type and topic', specifying the verb 'list' (implied by name) and resource 'channels'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_servers or list_roles by focusing on channels and their grouping.

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?

Description mentions filter by type, which implies usage context, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like get_channel or other list tools. No exclusion criteria or alternative guidance is provided.

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