Slack MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions returning 'detailed user profile information' but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation (though implied by 'get').

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The Args/Returns sections are structured but slightly redundant since an output schema exists. Overall, it's efficient with minimal waste.

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 moderate complexity (single parameter, read operation) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details that would help an agent use it correctly alongside sibling tools.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaningful context by explaining that 'user_id' is 'The ID of the user (e.g., "U01234567")', providing an example format. However, it doesn't fully compensate for the lack of schema documentation, as it only covers one parameter superficially.

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 the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific user'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_user_profile' or 'lookup_user_by_email', which appear to serve similar user-related functions.

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 versus alternatives like 'get_user_profile', 'lookup_user_by_email', or 'list_users'. The description only states what it does without context about appropriate use cases or exclusions.

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