slack_stdio_catalog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, but the description does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, nor does it mention authentication or rate limits. It is adequate for a listing tool but could be more explicit about side-effect guarantees.

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 with no redundancy. The action and resource are stated first, followed by a precise usage instruction. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does and when to use it. It does not describe the exact return format, but the purpose of comparing local vs remote catalog is clear. An agent can invoke it correctly without additional context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds no parameter-related information beyond the schema, which is already complete (100% coverage with no parameters). This 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 states a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('local overlay tool names vs the current hosted mcp.slack.com catalog'). It is distinct from sibling tools like slack_stdio_reauth or slack_stdio_update_message, which perform different actions. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Use to verify the bridge is proxying the full remote set', providing a clear when-to-use context. It does not list exclusions or alternatives, but for a simple catalog-comparison tool this is sufficient. It clearly differentiates its use case from the other tool actions.

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