rlm_swarm_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description does the heavy lifting by disclosing that the tool returns a list of agents with fields like role, status, capabilities, etc. It implies read-only behavior, though it doesn't explicitly say 'no side effects'.

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 concise with three short paragraphs: purpose, return fields, and use cases. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields, and usage guidance well. Minor omission: no mention of possible empty results or pagination.

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?

The single parameter 'swarm_id' has a schema description 'Swarm ID', which is minimal. The description adds no further detail, but with 100% schema coverage, a baseline score of 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 clearly states 'List all agents in a swarm with their status', using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('agents in a swarm'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rlm_swarm_create or rlm_swarm_join.

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('See who's in the swarm', 'Find available agents', 'Monitor agent activity') but does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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