List seller-channel capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint:false, which the description confirms with 'Show'. The description adds specific context about the result contents (connectors, configuration state, operations) beyond what annotations provide, though it doesn't disclose any additional behaviors like authentication or caching expectations. Given annotation coverage, this is solid.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the purpose without any redundancy or filler. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 no parameters, a straightforward purpose, and an output schema, the description is completely adequate. The sibling tool context does not require additional disambiguation because the description already specifies its unique scope.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. A baseline score of 4 applies because the description need not compensate for any schema gaps.

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 seller-channel capabilities, specifying the types of information shown (installed connectors, configuration state, supported operations). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like channel_health which likely focuses on health status.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. It doesn't mention exclusions, prerequisites, or contrast with sibling tools. The readOnlyHint annotation implies safe usage, but the description itself lacks any usage direction.

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