Angular: workspace map

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It explains that the tool understands multiple workspace configurations and lists the information it provides, but it does not disclose return format, side effects, or why it should only be called once per session. The 'Call once per session' hint implies caching or heaviness, but lacks detail.

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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The first sentence lists the core content, the second adds context about config styles and usage frequency. All information is relevant and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description enumerates the main data categories (projects, versions, strictTemplates, zone.js) and config styles. For a read-only mapping tool with a single optional parameter, this adequately sets expectations. It could benefit from stating return shape, but the sibling tools make the use case clear.

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% (the single optional path parameter is fully described). The description adds no parameter-specific information, so baseline 3 is appropriate. The path meaning is already clear from the schema.

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 what the tool provides: workspace projects, versions, strictTemplates, and zone.js per project. It doesn't use an explicit verb like 'lists' or 'returns', but the noun-phrase structure conveys the resource and scope. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on workspace-level overview rather than component/template specifics.

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 instruction 'Call once per session' provides explicit usage guidance. Mentioning that it understands angular.json, Nx, and solution style indicates when it is applicable. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for this simple tool.

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