get_channel_info

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

The description provides no annotation context and only states that it 'gets information,' which suggests a read-only operation but does not disclose details such as required permissions, error behavior, or what is included in the returned information. It is not misleading, but it adds minimal behavioral insight beyond the verb.

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 sentence that is direct and front-loaded, containing no filler. It earns its place without redundant detail.

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?

The tool has only one parameter and no annotations, but no output schema is provided. The description fails to specify what 'information' is returned, such as channel name, topic, or member count, leaving the agent without enough context for the tool's full behavior.

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 already documents the channel_id parameter, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond 'specific channel.' With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('information about a specific channel'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_channels and get_guild_info. The term 'specific' signals it targets one channel by ID, making the purpose 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 implies the tool is for retrieving metadata for a single channel but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like list_channels or get_messages. No exclusions or prerequisite conditions are mentioned, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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