listSlackChannels

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

The description implies a read operation with 'retrieves', but with no annotations, it carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether archived channels are included, whether only channels the user belongs to are returned, or any pagination/rate-limit behavior. The workspace scoping is helpful but incomplete.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('Retrieves') and includes all necessary information. No filler or redundancy.

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 no output schema exists, the description should explain what the returned list contains (e.g., channel names/IDs). It only says 'a list of channels', which is somewhat vague. For a simple tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description need not explain parameter details. It appropriately avoids describing non-existent parameters, and the baseline of 4 applies.

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 tool retrieves a list of public and private Slack channels for the authenticated user's workspace. This distinguishes it from siblings like readSlackChannel (single channel) and postSlackMessage (posting), and specifies the resource (channels) and action (list).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as readSlackChannel for a specific channel or listTeamsChannels for Microsoft Teams. There are no exclusions or explicit context for selection.

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