Search Slack Messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable context: it uses your user token, includes channels/DMs/group messages, and supports rich search modifiers. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sections for modifiers, args, returns, and examples. It is slightly lengthy but every section earns its place given the complexity of Slack search syntax and pagination.

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 includes the return format (text, author, channel, timestamp, permalink), pagination via the page parameter, and multiple practical examples. Since there is no output schema, this fully bridges the gap and gives the agent complete expectations.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining Slack search modifiers, providing example queries, and confirming defaults for sort, count, and page. This helps the agent construct effective queries 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 clearly states it 'searches messages across your entire Slack workspace' using the Slack search API, with specific verb, resource, and scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like slack_get_channel_history or slack_get_thread, which operate on a single channel or thread.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool: when you need to search across channels, DMs, and group messages using your user token. It notes that it searches 'everything you have access to,' which implies the broad use case, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state 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.