List All Channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the scope ('every channel configuration') but no additional behavioral details such as pagination, return format, or whether filtering is available. The bar is lower due to annotations, and the description adds a bit of value.

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, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no filler or redundant content. Every word 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only tool, the description is mostly adequate, but the existence of the sibling lyzr_list_channels creates ambiguity that the description does not resolve. There is no output schema, so the return format is undisclosed, which slightly reduces completeness for an agent needing to know what to expect.

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, and schema description coverage is trivially 100%. With no parameters to explain, the baseline for parameter semantics is 4, and the description rightly stays silent on them.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'channel configuration' and the qualifier 'every' to indicate an all-encompassing operation. It is clear and distinct from create/delete channel tools, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the similarly named sibling lyzr_list_channels.

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. A sibling tool named lyzr_list_channels exists, and the description gives no context for choosing between 'list all channels' and 'list channels', nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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