List Team Channels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the delegated permission requirement (Channel.ReadBasic.All) and the dependency on a teamId obtained from another tool, which implies a read-only operation. It does not mention pagination or edge cases, but for a basic list tool this is reasonably transparent.

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: two sentences delivering purpose, prerequisite, and permission, followed by useful multilingual intent examples. There is no fluff or redundant content.

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 one-parameter list tool, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and auth. It lacks an explicit statement of return format or pagination, but the absence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the operation make this acceptable.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage, describing teamId as 'usually from teams_list_joined_teams.' The tool description repeats this same guidance without adding new detail, so no significant value is added beyond the schema.

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 tool lists channels in a Microsoft Teams team, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like teams_get_team and teams_list_joined_teams by explicitly targeting the channels collection.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisite guidance ('Use teams_list_joined_teams first to obtain a teamId') and a required permission, which helps the agent sequence calls correctly. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives, but the context is sufficient for a simple list operation.

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