mempalace_follow_tunnels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the tool returns data (connected rooms with drawer previews) and implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, required permissions, or any behavioral constraints beyond the basic outcome.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no extraneous information. It immediately states the action and the result, using active voice and clear structure.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value ('connected rooms with drawer previews'). It covers the primary purpose and key parameters. However, it could mention that it is a read-only operation and possibly provide hints on the expected format of drawer previews.

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% with each parameter described ('Wing to start from', 'Room to follow tunnels from'). The description adds context by mentioning 'in other wings' and 'drawer previews', enhancing the understanding of what the parameters achieve beyond the schema alone.

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 uses a specific verb 'follow tunnels' and clearly identifies the resource ('from a room') and outcome ('see what it connects to in other wings'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like mempalace_find_tunnels and mempalace_traverse by focusing on following existing connections.

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 usage when wanting to explore tunnel connections from a specific room, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like mempalace_find_tunnels or mempalace_traverse. No contraindications or prerequisites are mentioned.

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