Search messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without the description repeating it. The description adds no behavioral context beyond syntax, such as result scoping across channels, permission requirements, or pagination behavior when many matches exist.

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 that states the capability and immediately grounds it in examples, with no filler or redundancy. Every element earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description should carry more of the return-value burden; it never says what a result contains or how pagination across pages behaves. It is adequate for calling the tool, but an agent cannot anticipate the response shape or result volume.

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 75% and sort/limit are already documented inline, but the description meaningfully enriches the required query parameter by showing three concrete composite queries that demonstrate how modifiers combine. That goes beyond the schema's bare list of modifier names and is genuinely useful for constructing valid input.

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 pairs a specific verb (Search) with a specific resource (messages) and names the exact query language, Slack search syntax, so the agent knows precisely what kind of input drives this tool. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from read_messages or read_thread, which also return message content, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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 presence of Slack search modifiers suggests this is for targeted retrieval rather than browsing a channel. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over read_messages or read_thread, and no mention of prerequisites such as being a member of the searched channels.

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