list_rooms

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one non-obvious behavior: results come back in creation order. The imperative to continue with a cursor also signals pagination. It says nothing about read-only safety, whether the list is filtered or scoped, or total counts, so the disclosure is partial.

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?

A single semicolon-delimited sentence with the ordering guarantee front-loaded and the pagination instruction second. Every clause earns its place and there is no filler.

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-only list tool with no output schema and no annotations, ordering plus pagination is a reasonable minimum. It still leaves the return payload shape (what fields a room has) and page-size behavior undocumented, which a caller would need for reliable iteration.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the cursor's purpose as a continuation token, which is the key non-obvious parameter, but says nothing about limit semantics, defaults, or how limit and cursor combine. It partially offsets the coverage gap rather than closing it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List rooms") and adds the ordering guarantee ("creation order"), which distinguishes it from a plain unordered list. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like list_messages or get_detail, but the resource noun makes the scope unambiguous.

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?

"continue with cursor" implies the pagination workflow (call again with the returned cursor), which is useful usage context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or on how limit interacts with cursor.

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