slack_lists_create

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without any indication of side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is reversible. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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 extremely concise at four words, but it may be overly minimal. It lacks any contextual information or structure. While it is brief, it does not earn its single sentence by providing value beyond the tool name.

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 tool's complexity (3 parameters, one required, and an output schema), the description is incomplete. It omits details about the output, any constraints on list creation (e.g., name uniqueness, limits), and how this tool fits into the broader list management workflow. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of behavioral context.

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 input schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action and resource: 'Create a new list.' It is specific and matches the tool name. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'slack_lists_update' or 'slack_lists_items_create', so it misses the highest bar for distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'slack_lists_update' or 'slack_lists_items_create'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without crucial decision-making information.

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