List rooms

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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature of the call. The description adds what is returned (room type, E2EE status, last activity, local indexing) and enumerates E2EE key states, which is valuable context beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded with the verb and resource, followed by a short routing sentence. The first sentence is dense but every clause earns its place by listing returned fields and E2EE statuses.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately explains what the list contains, including the E2EE key status values. It does not cover pagination or ordering, but the schema already documents the limit parameter with its default.

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 100%, so all four parameters are documented in the input schema itself. The description reinforces room types but does not add syntax or behavioral details for limit, filter, or encrypted_only, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb (list) and resource (rooms), and scopes it to rooms this account belongs to. It names the room types and returned attributes, making it clearly distinguishable from message, user, or file tools.

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?

It explicitly says to use it to find room ids/names for the other tools, which gives clear context for when to reach for it. It does not state when not to use it or name alternative discovery tools, but no sibling appears to overlap.

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