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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that only accessible workspaces are returned ('you have access to'), but does not mention return format, pagination, or explicit read-only behavior. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It includes the necessary scope clarification ('you have access to') without redundancy. Perfectly concise.

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?

With no output schema and zero parameters, the description gives the essential information: what is listed and the access constraint. It does not specify the exact return structure, but for a simple list operation, this is minimally sufficient and not incomplete.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms this (coverage 100%). The description adds meaning by clarifying that 'all' accessible workspaces are listed, reinforcing the parameterless nature. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no further parameter explanation is needed.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'workspaces (servers)' with an explicit scope 'you have access to'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., list_documents, list_sheets) by referring to a distinct resource type (servers/workspaces).

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 provides clear context: this tool lists all accessible workspaces. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the resource distinction from other list tools implies usage. No exclusion criteria are needed for a parameterless list operation.

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