get_slack_channel_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that only messages visible to the bot are returned (a real behavioral constraint), but doesn't disclose whether it's a read-only operation explicitly, date-range scoping, message count limits, or that it returns a paginated cursor-based result to subsequent calls.

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?

A single clear sentence that states the purpose efficiently. Zero waste. It could arguably be even more informative, but for a concise description it's appropriately brief and front-loaded.

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?

There is an output schema, so return format need not be explained. The tool has 4 params all covered by schema and a pagination cursor, yet the description doesn't mention pagination behavior or how the cursor ties to results. For a read tool with an output schema and full param coverage, this is adequate but could note the pagination mechanism more explicitly.

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 all 4 parameters (limit, cursor, account_id, channel_id) have schema-level descriptions. The description adds the 'recent' scoping and bot-visibility constraint that gives context for channel_id, but adds nothing beyond the schema for limit/cursor/account_id semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 says 'Get recent Slack messages for a channel visible to the bot' — specific verb (Get), resource (Slack messages), and scope (recent, for a channel visible to the bot). It's distinct from sibling tools like search_slack_messages and list_slack_channels, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 notes messages are 'visible to the bot,' implying access constraints, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus search_slack_messages or list_slack_channels. There's no mention of pagination usage, rate limits, or channel prerequirements.

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