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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavioral context beyond that by explaining the isSelected flag's meaning and its link to omitting workspaceId elsewhere, which the annotations and schema do not convey.

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?

A single clause-and-a-half sentence with zero waste, front-loading the action and following with the one non-obvious semantic detail.

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 parameterless read-only listing tool with full annotation coverage and an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it returns and how the returned default interacts with other calls.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description uses the space instead to explain the cross-tool meaning of the returned isSelected field, adding value rather than restating 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists the user's workspaces') with the scope narrowed to the authenticated user. Sibling tools (sql_query, submit_review, etc.) are unrelated enough that no disambiguation is needed.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, but the tool's purpose is narrow and the description adds a useful usage-adjacent fact: the isSelected default is what other calls fall back on when workspaceId is omitted, implying this is the discovery step before other calls.

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