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

The description adds a behavioral filter ('currently have activity') beyond the schema, but does not define what constitutes activity or disclose any limitations. With no readOnlyHint annotation, the 'List' verb alone suggests read-only behavior, but the description does not elaborate on output format, auth requirements, or side effects.

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 containing only the core function and scope, with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded and appropriately brief.

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 is simple, but the description omits details about what a 'room' includes, how activity is determined, and the return value structure (no output schema). It covers the basic function but leaves ambiguity about the exact semantics.

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 input schema fully documents the single 'limit' parameter (including its default), and the description adds no parameter-specific information. Per the baseline rule, with high schema coverage, this scores 3.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'discussion rooms' and the scope 'currently have activity', making it clear that this returns active chat rooms. This distinguishes it from siblings like chat_messages or chat, which deal with messages or direct messaging.

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 when to use this tool (when you want active discussion rooms) but does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. Since there is no comparison to other list tools, the guidance is only implied.

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