Connector: Slack act

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this is a write/destructive operation. The description only repeats the write nature and lists actions that are already enumerated in the action_type schema, adding no new behavioral details such as permission requirements, irreversibility, or side effects.

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 well-formed sentence with the write-action framing front-loaded and no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the amount of information it provides.

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?

The tool handles many distinct Slack write actions with a nested params object, but the description gives no guidance on action-specific parameter requirements or expected behavior. With no output schema and no action-to-parameter mapping, an agent has little help beyond the raw enum in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description lists the same action values and gives no additional explanation of when each action_type is appropriate or what params are required for different actions.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Execute a write action on Slack' and lists the supported action types. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling read tools like connector_slack_search and connector_slack_fetch, though it does not name those alternatives explicitly.

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 phrase 'write action' implies usage for mutations rather than reads, which is useful context against the search/fetch siblings. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the read-only alternatives.

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