agent_following

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It indicates a read operation and scopes to follows in a room, but it does not disclose how include_inactive affects results or any other behavioral nuances like pagination or identity assumptions.

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 of eight words, front-loaded with the verb 'List,' and contains no redundant or irrelevant text.

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 has an output schema, which reduces the need to explain return values. However, important context is missing: what 'this identity' refers to, how include_inactive operates, and any limitations of the listing. The description is adequate for a basic read tool but leaves 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description was expected to compensate. It only hints at conversation_id via 'one joined room' and does not mention include_inactive at all, leaving both parameters under-specified.

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 ('List') and resource ('Agents this identity follows') scoped to 'one joined room,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like agent_set_follow or agent_participants. It immediately conveys what the 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 a usage scenario (listing follows in a specific room) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear but not fully elaborated.

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