mcp-agent-hub

join_room

Join a collaboration room so multiple agents can coordinate work through shared messaging and task context.

Instructions

加入协作房间。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "room": "<room>"
    },
    "name": "join_room"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`room`	Yes
`agent`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about idempotency, what happens if the room does not exist, whether joining is reversible, or any permission requirements. A single sentence restating the action leaves the mutation semantics entirely opaque.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is front-loaded and waste-free, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is no structure or detail an agent could act on beyond the tool name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but for a room-membership mutation with zero annotation coverage the description omits everything an agent needs: how joining relates to join_hub, whether the agent identity matters, and what state changes result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to compensate and does not — neither the required "room" nor the optional "agent" (which defaults to empty) is explained. The only mitigation is that the parameter names are largely self-explanatory.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb+resource ("join a collaboration room"), which is more than a tautology. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings such as join_hub, create_room, or list_rooms, so the agent cannot tell from the text which room-joining tool fits which situation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many sibling tools. The agent must infer entirely from the name that this is for joining an existing room rather than creating or listing one.

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