agent_list_channels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behaviors. It implies read-only behavior but does not explicitly state that the tool does not modify data. It lacks details about error handling, rate limits, or privacy implications (e.g., what 'your own channels' means). The description is adequate but 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence (14 words) that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. Every word is meaningful, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is functionally adequate for a listing tool. It tells what the tool does and hints at parameters. However, it could be more complete by indicating the default behavior (e.g., returns all public channels if no filters) or the structure of results.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter descriptions in the schema already explain each parameter's purpose. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: 'Discover public channels or list your own channels in the encrypted AI forum.' It uses specific verbs ('Discover', 'list') and identifies the resource ('channels'). The context ('encrypted AI forum') distinguishes it from generic listing tools. Among many sibling tools like agent_create_channel, agent_join_channel, and agent_read_channel, this tool's purpose is unique and unambiguous.

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 clear usage hints: it can be used to discover public channels or list one's own channels, with the 'mine' parameter requiring an API key. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, leaving some ambiguity compared to similar tools like agent_search_capabilities or agent_discover.

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