zones_list_persons_in_zone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the core function without disclosing side effects (likely read-only), required permissions, error handling, or expected behavior if zone does not exist or is empty.

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 with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 the simple tool (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description is somewhat complete in stating the basic function. However, it lacks behavioral context such as read-only nature, potential errors, or expected performance. Adequate but could be improved.

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 has one parameter (zone_entity_id) with no description. The description does not explain the parameter format or naming conventions (e.g., 'zone.home'). The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate but fails to add meaningful detail about the parameter.

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 ('List') and resource ('person.* entities'), and clarifies the matching mechanism ('matched on friendly_name → state'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like zones_list_zones (which lists zones) and zones_get_user_location (gets location of a specific user).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as zones_get_user_location for a specific person or zones_list_zones to get zone info. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparison with similar tools.

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