paydirt_list_slack_channels

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds domain-specific non-mutation context ('without changing assignments') and an environmental prerequisite ('when Slack is connected'), which go beyond the annotations to clarify behavior.

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, front-loaded with usage, no redundant phrasing. Every word adds value, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

The description covers the purpose and usage trigger, annotations cover the safety profile, and the output schema exists for return values. Nothing essential is missing for this simple, read-only list tool.

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 app_id having its own description ('The app ID'). The tool description does not add further parameter details, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles parameter semantics.

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 explicitly states the tool's function: 'Lists available channels' with a specific use case ('resolve a requested channel name to its channel ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like paydirt_list_forms or paydirt_slack_status.

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 opens with a clear trigger condition: 'Use this when Slack is connected and the agent must resolve a requested channel name to its channel ID.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the usage context is unmistakable and sufficient for a list-only tool.

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