grove_list_channels

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds 'Requires grove_read,' which conveys a permission requirement. It does not describe side effects or output format, but the annotation already covers safety, so the added requirement is meaningful.

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 brief and well-structured, consisting of two short sentences with no redundant information. It communicates the essential purpose and a requirement 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?

While the purpose is clear, the description omits details about the parameter and potential output structure or pagination. It does not fully equip the agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional inference.

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 only parameter, app_id, has no description in the schema or the tool description. The description does not clarify whether it is required, what it represents, or how it affects the listing. This leaves ambiguity for the agent.

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 (List), the resource (all active Grove channels), and the fields returned (name, type, description). It is sufficiently specific to distinguish from other list tools like store_list or store_search_all.

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 a clear purpose but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it describe any filtering or use-case constraints. It implies a simple listing operation but lacks explicit 'when-not' guidance.

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