List IRC networks

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description goes beyond by explaining the two states (connected/idle), that idle is normal, and that connections happen automatically on first use. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond structured annotations, helping the agent interpret results correctly.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence contributes either to clarifying the output states or to preventing misinterpretation. No redundant or filler content.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters), the read-only annotation, and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers necessary context. It explains the meaning of each state and the auto-connect behavior, making the tool self-sufficient for correct use.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add regarding parameters. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids irrelevant parameter details.

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 tool's action and resource: 'List configured IRC networks.' It also provides meaningful detail about the two possible states, which helps distinguish what the tool returns. This is a specific, non-tautological description that differentiates from sibling tools like irc_list_conversations.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (to see networks) and provides important guidance about idle state: 'Idle is normal and not an error' and 'do not treat idle as a failure.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the contextual instructions are sufficient for correct usage.

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