Search chat stats channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description usefully narrows the search space to channels actually tracked by chat stats rather than the whole platform. However, it omits matching behavior (prefix vs substring vs fuzzy) and whether multiple results are returned, which are the traits an agent would most need here.

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 no padding or restatement of the title. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves no room for the behavioral detail that would make it more useful.

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?

With one required parameter fully documented in the schema, no output schema, and safe read-only annotations, the core call is callable. The description still leaves the result shape and matching semantics unspecified, which is a real gap for a search tool with no output schema.

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 100% and the schema already specifies 'Channel name (lowercase login name, not an id)', including the lowercase-login constraint. The description's 'by channel name' adds nothing beyond that, so the 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 (search) and resource (channels tracked by chat stats) scoped by channel name, which distinguishes it from stat-reading siblings like chatstats_stats or chatstats_epm. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with chatstats_get, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no named alternative for looking up a specific channel's stats (chatstats_get). Usage must be inferred entirely from the verb.

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