infomaniak_list_kchat_channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds context about the API surface ('Mattermost-compatible') and administrative scope, which is useful, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details like pagination or filtering semantics beyond the 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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no filler or redundancy. Every word adds value.

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 simple input schema (one optional parameter), the presence of an output schema, and the read-only annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and context. A minor gap is the lack of explicit distinction from the similarly named 'list_kchat_team_channels' tool, but overall it is sufficiently 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?

Schema coverage for the single parameter (team_id) is 100% with a clear description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra parameter context, but the schema already suffices.

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 lists kChat channels within the account, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the similar sibling 'infomaniak_list_kchat_team_channels' by emphasizing account scope, though it does not explicitly contrast with that tool.

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 implies usage for admin/governance tasks via the phrase 'admin/governance side,' but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives. The context is present but not fully articulated.

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