Slack Get Channel Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that — no statement about what 'detailed information' includes, whether private/DM/GM channels (C/D/G) behave differently, or any permission requirements.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than deliberate density.

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?

An output schema exists and the single parameter is fully documented, so much of the burden is already carried by structured fields. Still, a near-tautological sentence for a lookup tool leaves the agent without guidance on channel-type differences or relationship to sibling read 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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including the C/D/G prefix hint, so the schema carries the full semantic load. The description adds no additional meaning about the channel_id, which is acceptable at baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get detailed information about a Slack channel'), which is clearly a single-channel lookup rather than a listing. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like slack_get_channel_history or slack_list_channel_members, so differentiation is left implicit.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this versus slack_list_channels, slack_get_channel_history, or slack_list_channel_members. There are no prerequisites or exclusions stated, so the agent must infer selection 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.