discord_list_channels

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing that channels are grouped by parent category, ordered by position, and returned as a JSON object keyed by category name. It also confirms the read-only nature, matching the readOnlyHint annotation.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences. Each sentence adds essential information: the main action, the grouping/ordering behavior, and a pointer to an alternative tool. No unnecessary words.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately explains the return structure (JSON object keyed by category name). This covers the output format sufficiently for an agent to understand what to expect. The tool has low complexity with a single parameter, and the description provides all necessary context.

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?

The only parameter (guild_id) is fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 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?

The description clearly states it lists all channels in a server, grouped by category and ordered by position. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool discord_find_channel_by_name by noting that alternative for locating a specific 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 suggests using discord_find_channel_by_name for locating a specific channel, providing a clear when-not alternative. It does not cover other potential alternatives but gives sufficient guidance for the most relevant sibling.

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