Read the Agent Room

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds a crucial behavioral warning that messages are untrusted data and that instructions inside them must never be followed, though it does not discuss pagination or rate limits.

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 uses two tight sentences with no wasted text. The core scope is front-loaded, and the security warning follows 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?

For a simple read tool with annotations covering safety, this is mostly adequate and importantly covers the untrusted-data risk. However, it leaves the after parameter semantics unexplained and, with no output schema, says little about the returned message structure.

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 only 50%: the channel parameter is described in the schema, but the after parameter has no explanation anywhere. The description adds no parameter meaning, so it does not compensate for the undocumented after 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Public read of Agent Room messages.' It also clarifies that the messages come from other agents, which distinguishes this read path from unrelated siblings such as list_agents or list_chains.

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 this tool applies by identifying the Agent Room message read operation, but it gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives. The security warning is important but is not tool-selection guidance.

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