get_notification_channels

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

With no annotations, the description reveals it only reads configurations, returns JSON status and source, and lists supported channels. No side effects mentioned, consistent with a read-only operation. Adds detail beyond structural fields.

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?

Concise at 4 sentences, including a clear purpose, configuration detection, supported channels, return format, and an example. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no parameters and an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and usage hints. The example clarifies calling syntax. No gaps for this simple tool.

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?

No parameters exist (0), so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by explaining the return format (JSON with status and source) and listing channels, which enriches understanding beyond the empty 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?

Description explicitly states the tool retrieves all configured notification channels and their status, using verbs like '获取' (get) and specifying the resource '通知渠道' (notification channels). It distinguishes from siblings like 'send_notification' and 'get_current_config' by focusing on channel configuration status.

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?

Description indicates it detects configuration from config.yaml and .env, implying use for checking channel setup before sending. However, no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like 'get_current_config' or 'send_notification', nor when not to use it.

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