get_chat_channel_followers

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 mentions pagination behavior but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive. While agents can infer safety, explicit disclosure would improve 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?

Single sentence with a parenthetical clarification and a succinct pagination note. No wasted words; all information is essential 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?

For a list tool with pagination and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, follower distinction, and pagination method. It could optionally mention the response format (e.g., array of users with next_cursor), but the present details are sufficient for correct invocation.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying the concept of followers (not necessarily members) and the pagination mechanism, providing context beyond the schema definitions.

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?

Description clearly identifies the verb (list), the resource (followers of a Chat channel), and distinguishes followers vs members. It explicitly mentions ClickUp Chat v3, 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 notes pagination via cursor/limit, which guides usage for large result sets, but it does not contrast with sibling tools like get_chat_channel_members or provide explicit when-to-use scenarios. Adequate but not exceptional.

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