ha_list_areas

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 only states the basic operation without any behavioral details such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or the structure of the returned data. For a read-only list operation, some transparency is implied, but the description does not explicitly confirm safety or format.

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 sentence of 10 words, front-loading the verb 'List'. It is perfectly concise with no wasted words, and every word earns its place.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description minimally fulfills completeness by stating the scope. However, it does not describe the return format (e.g., list of names, objects) or any edge cases. For a simple tool, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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% (no undocumented params). Per baseline rules, this scores a 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: listing all areas/rooms in Home Assistant. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('areas/rooms'), and is distinct from sibling tools that deal with services, config, or entities.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough that the agent can infer it's for getting a complete list of areas. Sibling tools like ha_get_entities_by_area serve different purposes, so ambiguity is low.

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