razz-mcp

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining the implicit 'current room' state dependency, which it does. However, it omits error conditions (what if not in a room?), return format, and whether pinned messages include metadata like pinners or timestamps.

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?

Single sentence with zero waste. Information density is optimal—every word serves the purpose statement without redundancy.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool but lacks return value documentation (no output schema exists to compensate). Should ideally clarify what 'pinned' encompasses and the structure of returned messages.

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?

Zero parameters present, establishing baseline 4. The description correctly implies no room_id or filter parameters are needed, matching the empty schema.

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 verb (Get) and resource (pinned messages) with scope (current room). It distinguishes from siblings like razz_read_messages by specifying 'pinned' content, though 'current room' assumes implicit state knowledge.

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 explicit guidance provided on when to use this versus razz_read_messages or razz_read_thread. No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., requiring an active room context via razz_join_room).

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