discord_list_channels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists channels, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't mention permissions required, rate limits, pagination, or the format of returned data. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with an external API.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all channels in a guild') and adds clarifying detail ('Includes text, voice, category, thread channels'). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 1 parameter with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the resource scope but lacks details on permissions, data format, or error handling. For a simple list tool, this might suffice, but the absence of annotations and output schema means more context would be helpful.

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 has 1 parameter (guild_id) with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by clarifying that guild_id refers to a 'guild (server)', which helps interpret the parameter. However, it doesn't specify the format (e.g., numeric ID) or where to find it, leaving some ambiguity.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('channels in a guild'), specifying it includes text, voice, category, and thread channels. It distinguishes from siblings like discord_get_channel (singular) and discord_list_active_threads (only threads), but doesn't explicitly contrast with discord_list_guilds or discord_list_members, which operate on different resources.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. While the description implies it's for listing all channel types in a guild, it doesn't mention when to choose this over discord_get_channel (for a single channel) or discord_list_active_threads (for threads only), nor does it address prerequisites like needing guild access.

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