List pinned messages

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's read-only. The description adds that results are ordered by newest pin first, providing useful behavioral detail beyond annotations. However, it omits potential pagination or limit information.

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?

A single sentence that is concise, front-loaded with key information, and contains no superfluous words. Efficient and to the point.

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 nature of a list tool with two parameters and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is fairly complete. It clarifies ordering, which is helpful. However, it doesn't mention potential pagination or maximum result count, which could be relevant for agents.

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 each parameter already described (channel name/ID, guild name/ID or default). The description does not add extra meaning or context beyond what the schema provides.

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), resource (pinned messages), scope (in a channel), and ordering (newest first). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like pin_message (which pins) and get_message (which gets a single message).

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 versus alternatives, such as when to use get_message or read_messages instead. The description only states what it does without contextual usage advice.

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