list_rooms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the core action (list) and the access restriction, implying read-only behavior but not disclosing pagination behavior, rate limits, or other operational details. The pagination token is mentioned in Args, but the description does not explicitly describe how the tool behaves overall.

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 a single-purpose opening sentence and a compact Args list. Every sentence earns its place, and the main functionality is front-loaded. No redundant or filler content is present.

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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description lacks explicit usage guidance and broader behavioral transparency, such as when to use this over sibling tools or how pagination works beyond a one-line note. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), and the description's Args section compensates with brief but meaningful definitions for all three parameters: workspace_id as the ID, limit as max results, and next_token as a pagination token. This adds necessary semantics beyond just the schema types and titles.

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 first sentence clearly states the action (List), the resource (rooms), and the scope (in a workspace accessible to the user). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_workspaces and list_murals_in_room, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 the tool is for listing rooms within a workspace but does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives such as list_murals_in_room or get_mural. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are mentioned, so the usage context is only implied.

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