huddo_list

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description's real contribution is disclosing the exact return shape (index, name, roomId, main channel, last message time, default marker) where no output schema exists. It does not mention ordering, pagination, or what happens if the identity is in no rooms.

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?

A single dense sentence with zero filler; the verb and scope are front-loaded and the column list and default marker follow immediately.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden well by naming every column, and the optional-parameter story is complete via the schema. The only gap is how the 'index' relates to other tools that likely take a room index.

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?

Only one optional parameter ('as') and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents it. The description adds nothing about the identity scoping beyond the phrase 'this identity', which is the baseline expectation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the rooms this identity is in') and enumerates the returned columns, which clearly separates it from huddo_members or huddo_app_list. It never explicitly names a sibling alternative, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'this identity is in' plus the 'as' parameter suggests a discovery step before acting on a room. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to huddo_show/huddo_members as the alternative for inspecting a single room.

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