look_around

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds a session dependency but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what 'around' means, how filters affect results, or what happens when no session exists. This is too sparse for a tool listing potentially sensitive peer data.

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 tight sentences with no wasted words. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the session context earns its place by adding a key operational detail without bloat.

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 five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: parameter meanings, return shape, limit behavior, and the relationship to session tools like create_session and session_status. An agent cannot reliably infer how to invoke or interpret this tool correctly.

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 only 20%, with just one of five parameters described. The tool description mentions none of the parameters (city, limit, activity, handlePrefix), so it fails to compensate for the schema's sparse documentation and leaves the agent without meaningful parameter understanding.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('peers on the Atlas roster'), with the clarifying parenthetical 'who is around.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_agent, which implies targeted search, and session_status, which checks session state.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as find_agent or request_collaboration. 'Uses the scoped Gateway session' hints at a prerequisite but does not explain when to choose this tool or when to avoid it.

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