Locate files in a Slack workspace or a specific channel. Filter by channel ID and limit the number of results to quickly retrieve the files you need.
List files in the Slack workspace or a specific channel.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | Maximum number of files to return | |
| channel | No | Optional channel ID to filter files by |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.8Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It signals a read-only enumeration via 'List' and adds the optional channel scope, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, result ordering, file visibility/access rules, or whether metadata is returned.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the action, resource, and optional scope in minimal words.
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 two-parameter list operation, this is nearly usable and the schema covers parameter semantics. However, with no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (metadata, pagination, format) or any access caveats, leaving some inference to the agent.
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 input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'workspace or a specific channel' reinforces the channel parameter but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.
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 identifies the action ('List'), the resource ('files'), and the scoping dimension ('workspace or a specific channel'). It is distinct from sibling file-related tools like upload_file, get_file_info, and delete_file, so an agent can tell it apart based on the stated verb and resource.
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 implies when to use the tool but gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over alternatives like get_file_info or search_messages. It lacks any exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison with sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.