read_channel

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

The description adds the ordering behavior 'oldest first' which is helpful. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, or error conditions. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden but is minimal.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted words.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description lacks usage guidance and parameter semantics. It is minimal for a tool with two parameters and several siblings, leaving the agent without enough context for correct invocation.

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 schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not explain channel_id or limit. It only implies 'recent' which might suggest a limit, but does not clarify that limit is optional or has a default of 50.

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 action (read), the resource (recent messages from a text channel), and the ordering (oldest first). It distinguishes from siblings like read_post which reads a single post, and list_posts which likely lists posts, by specifying the channel and message context.

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 versus alternatives like list_posts or read_post. The description does not mention exclusions or contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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