io_list_spaces

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description carries a reduced burden, but it adds essentially nothing: no mention of the default 50 / max 100 result cap, pagination via startAt, or the compact-vs-full response-shape behavior that materially affects output. All of that lives only in the parameter descriptions.

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?

Two compact sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the optional filter second. Nothing is padded, though the second sentence largely restates the schema's floorId description.

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 straightforward read-only list tool, the description plus a fully documented schema and a readOnlyHint annotation give the agent enough to call it correctly. Output schema is absent, but the only real omissions (pagination and view semantics) are covered by the schema fields themselves.

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% across all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description echoes only floorId filtering, adding no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already documents for view, search, orderBy, limit, and startAt.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List iOffice spaces (rooms)') and clarifies the domain term 'spaces' as rooms, which distinguishes it from io_get_space and the create/update/delete siblings. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so differentiation is by naming convention rather than by description.

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?

'Optionally filter by floor ID' hints at one supported use but gives no when-to-use vs. when-to-use-something-else guidance. It never mentions io_get_space for single-record lookup, the search/view/limit options, or when filtering by floor is preferable to listing everything.

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