close_room

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

The description and parameter descriptions explain the soft delete nature and agent termination behavior. However, no details on side effects (e.g., can the room be reopened?), authorization needs, or error conditions are provided. Given no annotations, the description carries full burden and is minimally adequate.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words. Highly concise and front-loaded with the core action and key qualifier (soft delete).

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?

Covers main behavior and key parameters. Lacks return value information or any post-condition guarantees (e.g., whether the room can be reopened). For a simple mutation tool, this is above baseline but could be more complete.

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 100% with clear field descriptions. The description adds context by reiterating the soft delete nature, but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it closes a communication room with soft delete behavior, distinguishing it from hard delete tools like delete_room or cleanup_stale_rooms. The precise verb 'close' and resource 'communication room' make the purpose 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., when to delete vs close, or when to terminate agents). The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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