list_channels

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint false. The description only repeats the read-only nature via the verb 'List' without adding any further behavioral context (e.g., permissions required, pagination, or side effects). Since it adds no new information beyond the annotations, the score is low.

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 a single, concise sentence that is appropriately sized. The verb 'List' is front-loaded, immediately conveying the action. There is no irrelevant or redundant wording.

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 is minimally adequate for a simple tool, but lacks contextual details such as what constitutes a channel, whether the operation is scoped, or how it differs from fetching a single channel. It does not mention any edge cases or alternatives, so the completeness is moderate.

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 schema has one parameter 'guild_id' with no description, and the tool description does not explain it. The parameter name suggests it is the server identifier, but the description does not explicitly connect it to the action. With 0% schema coverage and no compensatory explanation, the meaning is not enhanced.

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' and the resource 'channels', identifying the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_channel' (singular) and 'create_channel' by focusing on listing all channels in a server.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used to retrieve all channels, nor does it contrast with 'get_channel' or other channel-related tools. There is no explicit usage direction.

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