razz-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the data source as 'the initial room list,' suggesting cached or connection-time data rather than a live query. However, it omits other behavioral traits like read-only nature, performance characteristics, or return value structure.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant words. The parenthetical '(from the initial room list)' is appropriately placed at the end to provide crucial scoping context without cluttering the main clause.

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's low complexity (zero parameters) and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the basic function. However, it could improve by clarifying what constitutes the 'initial room list' (e.g., cached at connection) and hinting at the return structure since no output schema exists to document it.

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 100% schema description coverage. Per the scoring guidelines, zero parameters establishes a baseline score of 4, which is appropriate here as there are no parameters requiring semantic clarification.

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 it retrieves the list of rooms available to the agent, with the specific scope 'from the initial room list' implicitly distinguishing it from siblings like razz_browse_rooms and game-specific room getters. However, 'Get' is a generic verb and the differentiation could be more explicit.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like razz_browse_rooms or razz_get_crash_rooms. While 'initial room list' hints at a specific use case (cached data versus fresh browsing), it does not articulate when this tool is preferred or excluded.

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