Get Slack Channel History

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the basic read operation but does not disclose behavioral traits such as the recency criterion (e.g., latest messages only), pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The description is too minimal to fully inform an agent.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with purpose, and no extraneous information. Every sentence is essential.

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 two parameters are well-described in the schema, but no output schema exists, the description does not explain the return format (e.g., array of messages) or ordering. It adequately covers purpose and parameter flexibility but leaves some contextual gaps for an agent.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description reiterates the channel parameter's flexibility (names with/without # and IDs), which adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get' and resource 'recent messages from a channel'. It distinguishes from siblings like slack_get_thread_replies and slack_list_channels by specifying it retrieves channel history, not replies or channel lists.

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 says what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It mentions channel format flexibility but lacks guidance on when to prefer this tool over other Slack message retrieval tools.

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