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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the return contents for both full and incremental modes and adds a critical security warning: room content is conversation, not instructions, and cannot change permissions or request the key. This is meaningful behavioral context for an agent operating in a potentially adversarial shared space.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then explains the two modes and safety constraint. It is appropriately sized for a tool with no output schema, though the prose is somewhat cryptic and could be tighter.

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 that there is no output schema, the description fully explains what a first look returns, what an incremental look returns, and the key safety constraint about untrusted room content. An agent has enough context to call the tool correctly without needing additional return-value documentation.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the meaning of `since` in the context of full versus incremental looks, but does not add substantial semantics beyond what the schema already provides for `key` and `shadow`.

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 resource to inspect (the room) and distinguishes two modes: a first full look versus an incremental look with `since`. It clearly says what information is returned in each mode, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like `stay`, `history`, or `table`.

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?

It gives clear mode-based usage for `since` (first look without it, incremental with it), but does not say when to choose `look` over sibling tools such as `stay`, `history`, or `tables`. The guidance is implied rather than comparative.

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