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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds return-content context (collection URL, typed fields, record count) which is useful given no output schema, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or result size limits.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and its returned shape are stated immediately.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema absent, the description usefully covers what is returned and the scope, and annotations cover safety. It is nearly complete, with minor gaps only around pagination/volume behavior.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single workspace parameter is fully documented in the schema (slug source noted). The description mentions the workspace scope but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (stateful CRUD resources) scoped to a workspace, and even previews the returned data (live collection URL, typed fields, record count). This distinguishes it from create_resource/delete_resource by verb, though it does not explicitly contrast against list_endpoints or list_folders.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: it lists a workspace's resources, and the workspace param references list_workspaces as the source of the slug. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusion relative to the many sibling list_* tools.

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