slack_list_reactions

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

The description lacks any disclosure of behavioral traits beyond being a connector operation. It does not mention read-only nature, required permissions, or return value characteristics. With no annotations, the description should provide more context but fails to do so.

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 fairly concise but includes routing implementation details ('Routes through `/api/tools/invoke`...') that are unnecessary for tool selection and add noise. It could be more focused on the tool's purpose and usage.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description omits critical context such as what entity reactions are listed from (message, channel). The parameter documentation is insufficient, leaving the agent without enough information to correctly invoke the tool for its intended use case.

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 'arguments' is described as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which adds no meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the expected JSON structure, but it does not. The baseline score is 3 due to low parameter count.

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 states the tool is a 'Slack connector operation `list_reactions`', identifying the verb and resource. However, it fails to specify what reactions are being listed (e.g., on a message, channel, or user). This vagueness reduces clarity compared to more specific descriptions.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While sibling tools like 'slack_add_reaction' and 'slack_remove_reaction' exist, the description does not differentiate use cases or provide context for when to list reactions.

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