list_by_room

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. It implies a read-only listing but says nothing about permissions, pagination, output shape, or whether room names are exact-match. The only behavioral fact conveyed is the no-room fallback.

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?

One short sentence with the primary mode front-loaded. The clause "or with no room, show every room count" is grammatically loose and takes a moment to parse, but there is no wasted content.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the tool has only one optional parameter. Still, for a listing tool with zero annotation coverage, the description is thin on matching behavior and result scope, leaving gaps an agent may hit at call time.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'room' parameter. It does explain the key semantic that an empty/absent room changes behavior to an all-room count view, but it does not describe expected room-name format, matching rules, or what the counts represent.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("List items") and states the two operating modes: scoped to one room, or across all rooms with counts. An agent can distinguish it from move_history or remove_item, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the closer sibling 'summary' or 'list_kinds'.

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?

Implicit usage guidance is present: pass a room to enumerate its items, omit it to get per-room counts. However, no alternatives are named (e.g., when to prefer 'summary' or 'search' instead), and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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