GetAvailableChannels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation ('List'), but lacks details on auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, or what 'available' means in terms of data freshness or scope.

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 a single concise sentence, efficiently conveying the core purpose. However, the minor grammatical error ('channel' instead of 'channels') slightly detracts.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks explanation of what a 'channel' is or the format of the returned list. It meets minimum viability.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds 'for this store', which is redundant with the required 'storeId' parameter. No additional meaning beyond the schema is provided.

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 states 'List all available channel for this store', which clearly indicates the action (list) and resource (available channels) with a scope. It's specific and distinct from sibling tools like GetChannels or GetChannelCatalog, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many similar sibling tools, there is no context for when 'available channels' is the appropriate choice, nor any mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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