Get a workspace

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

Annotations already convey the safe, read-only, idempotent nature. The description adds that the Workspace resource is returned with its fingerprint, which is useful, but it does not disclose error conditions, permissions, or other behavioral traits beyond the structured 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys both the operation and the key return detail. No redundant information is present.

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 simple read operation with complete schema coverage and safety annotations, the description adequately covers purpose and a key return aspect (fingerprint). It could be improved by referencing list_workspaces for alternative use, but it is generally sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter clearly described (account_id, container_id, workspace_id). The description merely restates these identifiers without adding new semantic detail, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 tool's function: 'Gets one workspace' by three specific identifiers. It distinguishes from list_workspaces by explicitly indicating it retrieves a single resource, and the verb-resource pairing is unambiguous.

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 implies usage for fetching a single workspace, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like list_workspaces or get_resource, nor does it state when not to use the tool. Some context is present but lacks direct guidance.

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