tomo_delete_room

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It says 'stop and remove' but gives no details on whether stopping is reversible, what side effects occur (e.g., data loss), or required permissions. For a destructive operation, more transparency is needed.

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 very concise at one sentence. It is front-loaded with the action and key precondition. Could be slightly more structured with bullet points for clarity, but no wasted words.

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 it's a destructive operation with 1 parameter (0% schema coverage), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It should disclose return behavior, error states, and effects of the operation.

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 only mentions 'room ID' generically but doesn't explain what it looks like, how to find it, or constraints. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's parameter name.

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 specific verb-resource pairs ('Stop and remove a streaming room') and clarifies a precondition ('after confirming the room ID'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like tomo_create_room or tomo_list_rooms, but could be slightly more explicit about the distinction.

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 to use (after confirming room ID) but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to siblings. No guidance on prerequisites like whether the room must exist or be running.

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