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

Annotations already convey idempotency and non-destructiveness. The description adds meaningful session-scoping context: the change is for 'this session' and affects how other tools behave afterward. It does not contradict the annotations and provides value beyond them.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the consequence. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant wording.

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 one-parameter state-switching tool with supporting annotations, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, the session scope, and the effect on subsequent tools. No output schema is present, but none is needed to invoke this tool correctly.

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% coverage, including the note that workspace_id comes from list_workspaces. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond 'make this workspace active,' so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Make a workspace the active one for this session.' It also distinguishes itself from workspace-management siblings by explaining that surveys, wallet, and members tools operate on the active workspace, making the tool's role as a context-setter unmistakable.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: before operating with surveys, wallet, or members tools in a different workspace. It does not explicitly name exclusions or alternatives like list_workspaces or create_workspace, but the context is enough for an agent to choose this tool correctly.

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