slack-personal-mcp

by oviron

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

slack_get_permalink

Read-only

Get a direct link to any Slack message, opening it in Slack within its thread so you can share or reply in context.

Instructions

Link to a message (chat.getPermalink): opens it in Slack, inside its thread for replies.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "channel_id": "<channel_id>",
      "ts": "<ts>"
    },
    "name": "slack_get_permalink"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ts`	Yes
`workspace`	Yes
`channel_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.3Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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. The description adds that the link opens in Slack and places replies in thread context, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not mention permission requirements or how the permalink is returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The parenthetical API method and thread-context note are useful, though the phrasing could be slightly tighter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with three required, undocumented parameters, the description is too thin. The output schema reduces the burden of explaining return values, but the lack of parameter semantics leaves an agent without enough detail to invoke the tool confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the three required parameters—workspace, channel_id, or ts. It only implies that a message is being targeted, leaving formats and identifier semantics undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific purpose: retrieve a permalink for a Slack message, identified by the underlying chat.getPermalink API method. It clearly distinguishes the action from sibling tools like slack_read_thread or slack_search_messages, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied—call this when you need a link to a specific message—but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over slack_read_thread, slack_search_messages, or slack_read_channel. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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