get_channel_by_id_api_v1_channels

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

With no annotations and no behavioral details in the description, the agent has no information about side effects, authorization needs, or error behavior. The description is a bare minimum and does not disclose any traits beyond the obvious read operation.

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 short sentence, which is concise but sacrifices clarity and context. It is minimally acceptable for a simple tool but could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description should at least hint at what the returned data contains or any prerequisites. It does not, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable invocation.

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 0% and the description only repeats the parameter name ('id') without adding format, constraints, or usage examples. The tool has a single required parameter, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Get Channel By Id' clearly states the action (get) and resource (channel by ID), but fails to differentiate this tool from many sibling get_channel_* tools (e.g., get_channel_members_by_id, get_channel_messages) that also retrieve channel-related data. It lacks specificity about what exactly is returned.

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 over alternatives. Given numerous sibling tools for channel operations (e.g., get_channel_members_by_id, get_channel_messages), the description should indicate context, but it does not.

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