slack_search_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses search modifiers, sort options, and return pagination info, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits. This is adequate but not complete transparency.

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 well-structured with purpose, modifiers, an Args block, and a Returns note. No filler is present; every line earns its place and the most important usage info is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers all parameters, defaults, and return shape, and an output schema exists to detail return values further. It lacks explicit usage guidance versus siblings and deeper behavioral context, but for a search tool with this schema, it is nearly complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: query, sort with allowed values, sort_dir with asc/desc, count range (1-100), and page default. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search messages in the Slack workspace.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_channel_history or get_thread_replies by emphasizing search across the workspace with Slack query modifiers.

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 usage when a message search is needed, and lists supported modifiers, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use this tool. No exclusion criteria or sibling references are given.

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