list_forum_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does not state whether the result is paginated, whether the bot needs a specific permission/intent, how archived or unavailable forum channels are treated, or what the response shape is; 'all' implies completeness but is unverified.

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 short sentence with no filler and the resource front-loaded. It is appropriately terse, though it is under-specified rather than elegantly minimal.

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 simple read-only list tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. Missing are return-content expectations (fields per channel), ordering, and any pruning/pagination behavior an agent would want before calling it.

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 the sole parameter (guildId, with its DISCORD_GUILD_ID default) is fully documented in schema. The description adds no syntax or defaulting detail beyond the generic phrase 'in the server', so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List') and resource ('forum channels') with server scope. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like list_channels, find_channel, or get_forum_channel_info, so an agent must infer the difference from names alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as list_channels (all channel types) or get_forum_channel_info (single channel detail). The description only asserts what it does, not when to pick it.

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