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

Annotations already disclose write-type, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds the useful 'owner only' permission constraint, but says nothing about duplicate-name handling, workspace limits, or whether creation switches the active workspace.

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 short line with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized for what it says, though that is largely because it says very little.

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 mutation tool that creates a top-level resource, the description omits the things an agent most needs: idempotency/duplicate behavior, the effect on the caller's active workspace, and any post-conditions. The presence of an output schema offsets return-value concerns but not these gaps.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented, and the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning about why workspace_id/workspaceName appear on a create operation, which is the schema's most confusing aspect.

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?

It states a verb plus resource ('Create a new workspace'), so the action is identifiable, but the phrasing is nearly a restatement of the title 'Create Workspace' and offers no differentiation from siblings such as list_my_workspaces, get_all_workspaces, select_workspace, or update_workspace.

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?

'(owner only)' gives one precondition for use, but there is no guidance on when to create vs. select an existing workspace, what happens if one already exists, or how this relates to the sibling workspace tools.

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