list_my_chat_participants

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List participants' without mentioning pagination, ordering, permission requirements, error cases, or whether it returns all or only visible participants. This is a significant gap for a read operation.

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 very brief, using two lines for text and two for arguments. It is efficient but could benefit from a one-line summary of purpose before the args. No unnecessary content.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not provided), the description does not explain return structure, error handling, or scope (my chats vs agent chats). With no annotations, a minimal description like this is incomplete for an agent to reliably use the tool without additional context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds meaning: chat_id is labeled as 'The chat room ID (required)' and participant_type as 'Filter by type: 'User' or 'Agent' (optional)', which clarifies usage and specifies allowed values beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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 'List participants in a chat room' with specific arguments for chat_id and participant_type, making the action and resource clear. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tool list_agent_chat_participants by noting the scope (my chats vs agent chats), which slightly reduces clarity.

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 like add_my_chat_participant, remove_my_chat_participant, or list_agent_chat_participants. The description lacks context on prerequisites or exclusions, making it insufficient for an agent to decide optimal usage.

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