list_workspaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by stating it lists (a read-only action). It adds context about the workspace root and the controlling environment variable, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.

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 that states the action and resource first, then the location, then a pointer to the sibling tool. No wasted words, efficient and complete.

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 list tool with readOnlyHint annotation and no output schema, the description covers the key operational detail (where workspaces are found) and points to the related tool. An agent has everything needed to call it 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 tool has zero parameters, so per the rubric baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, but it does clarify the source of the list, which indirectly explains why no parameters are 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 clearly states the action (list) and the resource (all available workspaces), and specifies the location via environment variable with a default. It distinguishes itself from set_workspace by explicitly naming the sibling for a different purpose.

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?

It names the alternative tool (set_workspace) for the related but distinct operation of switching, giving clear context on when to use which. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool beyond that, but for a list operation the intent is obvious.

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