list_rooms

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 a significant behavioral trait: returned rooms are 'stripped to id+name+type'. It also mentions the default limit, though that is already in the schema. However, it does not disclose other potential behaviors such as ordering, pagination or error conditions, which would typically be needed for a list operation. This is adequate but not rich, so a 3.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately conveys the action, resource, scope, and key output characteristic. It contains zero superfluous information and is easy to parse.

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 simple list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description effectively conveys the purpose and the stripped output fields. It does not explicitly describe the response envelope (e.g., array or paginated object), but given the low complexity and available schema, it is sufficiently complete. The lack of an explicit mention of pagination behavior beyond the limit is a minor gap.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of both parameters with descriptions (workspaceId and limit). The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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' and resource 'rooms' with a scope 'in a workspace'. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_workspaces and list_murals, which target different resources. The addition of 'stripped to id+name+type' further clarifies the scope of returned data.

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 clearly implies this is the tool for listing rooms within a specific workspace, providing context for when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions, so it falls short of a 5. The context is clear enough to guide selection, so a 4 is appropriate.

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