list_active_channels

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

No annotations provided. The description implies a safe read operation, but does not disclose behavioral details such as latency, caching, or whether it affects server state. 'Active' is undefined, and there is no mention of side effects or required permissions.

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 sentence containing all essential information. No unnecessary words, well-structured 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?

While the description clarifies the tool's purpose, it lacks information about the return value or output format. Since there is no output schema, the description should ideally describe what the listing includes (e.g., channel IDs, names). Without this, the agent may be uncertain about what to expect.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by specifying that the channels are 'active' and 'currently connected', which provides context beyond the empty schema. For a parameterless tool, this is excellent.

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 verb 'list' and the specific resource 'active Figma plugin channels' with a qualifier 'currently connected to the WebSocket server'. It uniquely identifies the tool's function among siblings like 'join_channel'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or typical scenarios. The description is purely functional without context.

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