memory_create_room

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

Annotations are present (readOnlyHint=false, etc.) and the description adds context: it explains the shared nature across assistants and that the returned address serves as a domain for other tools, without contradicting annotations.

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 concise at 4 sentences, front-loading the main purpose and including operational details. Could be slightly tighter, but overall well-structured.

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?

With 2 parameters well-documented in schema and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use it with sibling tools, leaving no important 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining name uniqueness within an account and that the returned address is used as a domain for memory_write/memory_read.

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 'Create a SHARED memory room' and explains it as a space for sharing context across assistants, distinguishing it from siblings like memory_write, memory_read, and memory_invite_to_room.

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 says 'Use when the user wants to share context or collaborate with someone else' and provides an example. It also gives next steps (call memory_invite_to_room), though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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