Retrieve the permalink URL for a Slack message by providing its channel ID and message timestamp, so you can reference or share the exact message.
Get the Slack URL for a message using its channel and timestamp.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel | Yes | Slack conversation ID. Resolve the intended channel or DM before sending. | |
| message_ts | Yes | Slack message timestamp, kept as a string. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is a 'Slack URL', which is useful, but says nothing about failure modes (e.g., missing message or inaccessible channel) or any rate-limit behavior.
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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Everything it says is relevant and it gets to the operation immediately.
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 two-parameter read-only lookup with complete schema coverage, rich annotations, and no output schema, this is nearly sufficient. A note on what happens when the message cannot be found or on how to obtain a timestamp would close the remaining gap.
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 is 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema, including ID patterns and the timestamp-as-string convention. The description merely restates the two parameter names without adding format or resolution guidance, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('the Slack URL for a message'), which unambiguously identifies the operation. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like slack_search_messages or slack_read_channel, but the action is distinct enough to be recognizable.
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?
Usage is only implied: the agent can infer it should call this when it needs a shareable link to a known message. There is no explicit 'when to use' guidance, no mention of alternatives such as searching for a message first if the timestamp is unknown, and no prerequisites stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.