get_pinned_channel_messages_api_v1_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavior. It states 'Get' implying a read operation, but lacks details on pagination, rate limits, or what happens when there are no pinned messages. The presence of an output schema is not mentioned, nor is the order or format of results.

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 extremely concise (three words), but this brevity comes at the cost of clarity and completeness. It lacks structure (e.g., front-loading key details) and does not include necessary context, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 complexity of the sibling tools and the presence of an output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain that this tool retrieves only pinned messages for a given channel, with pagination support, which would enable proper agent selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the parameter names ('id' and 'page') are minimally documented. The description does not explain that 'id' likely refers to the channel ID or that 'page' controls pagination, leaving the agent with no insight beyond the bare schema titles.

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 Pinned Channel Messages' clearly states the action (Get) and resource (Pinned Channel Messages), which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_channel_messages, which might also retrieve messages, but the qualifier 'Pinned' implies filtering.

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 get_channel_messages. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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