slack_get_channel_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic read operation and does not reveal pagination behavior (despite the cursor/limit parameters), ordering, or what 'recent' means. This lack of detail could lead to incorrect assumptions about the returned data.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and directly states the tool's action and target, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, pagination via cursor, and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to use limit/cursor for iteration, what the response structure looks like, or any constraints. A more complete description would mention pagination and return format.

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 description coverage is 100% for all three parameters (channel, limit, cursor), so the schema already provides clear meaning. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema offers, which matches the baseline expectation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('recent messages from a Slack channel'), which clearly conveys the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like slack_get_thread (which targets threads) and slack_list_channels (which lists channels), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 like slack_get_thread or slack_send_message. It does not mention prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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