paydirt_slack_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds what the tool reports (channel and form assignment status) and a conditional behavior (fallback to channel selection), which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 the primary usage context, and no wasted words. Every sentence contributes purpose, timing, or alternative behavior.

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 status-checking tool with an output schema, the description fully covers when to use it, what it reports, and what to do in edge cases. Nothing critical is missing.

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 single parameter app_id is fully described in the schema ('The app ID') with 100% coverage. The description does not add parameter-specific details, but the baseline 3 applies because the schema carries the burden.

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 the tool's purpose: to report the created Paydirt cancellation feedback channel and whether every installed form is assigned. The verb 'reports' plus the specific resource (Slack status after authorization) distinguishes it from siblings like paydirt_connect_slack or paydirt_list_slack_channels.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when Slack authorization has finished and before declaring setup complete.' It even gives an alternative action ('List or select channels') for a specific condition (automatic creation blocked or user requested another channel), providing clear when/when-not guidance.

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