Are.na user channels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only describes the listing action and gives no details about pagination, ordering, visibility, or response shape. There is no contradiction, but behavior beyond the basic operation is undisclosed.

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?

One sentence with no filler; the core operation and purpose are front-loaded before the dash. Every phrase earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema or annotations, and the description omits pagination behavior and return context, so an agent lacks information for a complete call. For a three-parameter tool with two undocumented pagination options, this is insufficient.

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 only 33% (id has a description); the description repeats that id accepts a slug or id but does not add meaning beyond the schema. It gives no guidance on 'per' or 'page', which remain undocumented.

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 ('List') and resource ('a specific author's channels') and identifies the input method ('by slug or id'), making the tool's function clear. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the resource scope distinguishes it from arena_channel and arena_search.

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 'to dig through their collections' gives a clear intended use case for choosing this tool. It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but the context is enough to route an agent to this list endpoint.

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