list_room_locations

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 discloses that the tool reads from a cache or configuration, includes cache_updated and cache_age_days in the response, and implies read-only behavior. This is good transparency for a listing tool, though it could explicitly state that it is read-only.

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 four sentences long, with the first sentence stating the purpose. Every sentence adds value: data sources, relationship to other tools, and cache behavior. There is no fluff or unnecessary repetition.

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 the simple nature of the tool (one optional parameter, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, data sources, usage context, and response cache fields. It is complete and does not require additional information.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'instance,' with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional details about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'List all room booking locations (sites) known for this Indico instance,' specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that the location name is required by several other room-related tools, positioning itself as a prerequisite.

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 explains how data is sourced (cache or config) and suggests when to re-run discover_rooms based on cache age. It also notes that location names are required by search_rooms, find_available_rooms, etc., providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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