ews_list_rooms

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions two sources (Exchange and static) and hints at credentials (static never requires them), but does not disclose rate limits, error handling, authentication requirements for the Exchange path, or what happens when no rooms are found.

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 a single concise sentence (18 words) that front-loads the action and key differentiators. It earns its place without fluff, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 description lacks an explanation of the return format, which is important given no output schema. While the tool's parameters and sources are covered, the vague 'structured options' does not fully inform the agent about what to expect, such as properties of room objects 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?

Schema description coverage is 80%, baseline is 3. The description adds some value beyond schema by clarifying that attendee_count hides rooms with insufficient capacity and that 'static' source never requires credentials. However, most parameter descriptions are similar to 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'Exchange meeting rooms', and differentiates between dynamic room lists and static fallback. It also mentions the output as 'structured options for user selection', which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle meetings, calendar events, or audits.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the 16 sibling tools, there is no mention of when not to use it or which other tools might be more appropriate for related tasks like finding free slots or resolving attendees.

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