slack_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains supported operators, default count, sort semantics, and the effect of include_broadcasts=False, which goes beyond basic operation. It does not mention rate limits or authentication, but for a read-only search tool it provides substantial transparency.

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 and front-loaded, opening with a clear purpose then giving operator examples, then an Args block with each parameter's meaning. Every sentence earns its place, including the practical query example, and the length is appropriate for the tool's complexity.

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 moderate complexity (4 parameters, 1 required), an output schema exists, and the description covers usage context, parameter semantics, and behavior. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so thoroughly: it explains the query format with concrete examples, defines count default, clarifies sort values ('timestamp' vs 'score'), and specifies the behavior of include_broadcasts. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare input 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 the tool searches Slack messages using native Slack search syntax, with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly notes it is the 'widest net' for workspace-wide questions, distinguishing it from channel/history-specific sibling tools like slack_channel_history and slack_dm_history.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: for 'where was X discussed' questions across the whole workspace. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the 'widest net' phrasing and operator examples imply its broad-search role relative to the narrower sibling tools.

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