get_channel_detail

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

Discloses potential error responses (403/422) and implies read-only via API endpoint method (GET). With no annotations, additional details like rate limits or data limits would improve completeness.

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?

Structured with clear sections (intro, usage, note, API, return). Concise without unnecessary repetition, though some sections could be slightly tighter.

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?

Provides return structure with example fields and API endpoint. For a simple single-parameter get tool with no output schema, it covers essential context. Missing details like whether the channel ID is required (already in schema) and potential error handling beyond 403/422.

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 coverage, description implicitly defines channel_id through context (path and mention of 'specified sales channel'), but does not explicitly state its type, format, or required status beyond schema.

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 clearly states it retrieves detailed information of a specific sales channel, listing included fields like type, status, and link settings. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_channels or get_channel_comparison.

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?

Provides usage context ('suitable for confirming configuration') and a note about potential 403/422 errors under certain token permissions. Lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives.

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