slack_list_channels

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool enumerates conversations.list, is expensive, may return a rate_limited error on large workspaces, and notes that include_private only includes private channels the user has joined. This is strong, actionable transparency beyond the input schema.

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: a one-line purpose, a highly relevant cost warning, explicit alternatives, and a compact Args list. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important usage caveats are 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?

Given the tool has no required parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, filtering parameters, cost/rate-limit behavior, and recommended alternatives. It is fully sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke the tool.

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 input schema has no per-parameter descriptions, but the description provides a clear Args section explaining pattern (fnmatch glob), min_members (minimum member count), include_private (joined private channels), and limit (maximum channels returned, default 200). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('channels') and clearly states the filtering criteria (glob pattern and minimum member count). It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by noting when alternative tools are preferable, making the purpose 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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: it warns that this tool is expensive and rate-limited, and explicitly says to skip it and use slack_channel_history when the channel name is already known, and to use slack_channels_history for globs over joined channels. This directly helps the agent choose among siblings.

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