find_channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the case-insensitive matching and empty-query behavior, which is useful. It does not disclose return format or whether results are ordered, but for a simple read-only search this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words, and the most important behavior (case-insensitive substring match) is front-loaded. The empty-query behavior is a useful edge case stated efficiently.

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 read-only search tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key behaviors: matching semantics and empty-query behavior. It could mention what a 'strip' is or what fields are returned, but the sibling context and tool name make this largely inferable.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the query parameter's semantics: substring match on name, case-insensitive, empty lists all. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare 'Query' field, but it does not specify format details like trimming or wildcard behavior.

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 ('Find') and resource ('strips'), and clarifies the matching behavior (case-insensitive substring on name). It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like channel_detail or board_overview, though it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 implies usage: use it to find strips by name, and empty query lists all named strips. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over channel_detail or board_overview, but the context is reasonably clear for a search/lookup tool.

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