find_channel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies fuzzy/partial matching but does not disclose whether multiple matches are returned, what happens on ambiguity, or how the default guild fallback behaves.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the search scope front-loaded and zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a two-parameter lookup tool.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry more weight. It covers the core purpose but omits result shape (single vs. multiple matches) and ambiguity handling, leaving a search tool partially under-specified.

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%, so both parameters (name, guildId) are already documented, including the DISCORD_GUILD_ID default. The description's 'exact or partial' phrasing adds minor meaning about the name parameter's matching behavior, consistent with the baseline 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (find), resource (channel), matching method (exact or partial name) and scope (in a server). It is distinguishable from siblings like get_channel_info or list_channels, though it does not explicitly name those 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?

No guidance on when to prefer this over list_channels or get_channel_info, no prerequisites or exclusions, and no mention that partial matching may return multiple results. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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