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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds only scope ('all the data') and does not disclose auth needs or response behavior beyond what the annotations and output schema provide.

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?

It is short, but the single sentence is awkwardly phrased and includes the redundant qualifier 'that has previously been created.' It is concise without being well structured.

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?

For a simple GET-by-ID tool with rich annotations, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It only lacks sibling differentiation and usage context, which are minor gaps given the structured metadata.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, including how to obtain the workspace_id. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb and resource: get all data of a video workspace. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from list_workspaces, but the singular workspace phrasing and required workspace_id make the intent fairly clear.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_workspaces or other sibling tools. It also does not state prerequisites such as needing an existing workspace ID.

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