send_slack_notification

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Sends a generic notification message,' which restates the core function without explaining behavior like what happens if channel_id is omitted, whether a default channel is used, error handling, rate limits, or message formatting. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that sends external messages.

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, concise sentence with no fluff or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though it could have packed in more useful details 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 has no annotations, no output schema, and only two parameters, the description is too sparse to be fully useful. It fails to explain the channel resolution behavior, whether the message is formatted, potential failures, or the relationship with the notify_deployment_status sibling. This leaves key context missing for safe and correct 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?

The input schema already documents both parameters with clear descriptions (message and channel_id). The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about the parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies given the 100% schema coverage.

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 action ('Sends') and resource ('Slack channel'), and the word 'generic' differentiates it from more specific sibling tools like notify_deployment_status. However, it does not explicitly name any sibling, so it doesn't fully distinguish them.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the more specific notify_deployment_status. The word 'generic' implies use for non-specific notifications, but this is not stated clearly, and there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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