List GTM Workspaces

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

The annotations disclose readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, but the description itself does not explain behavior such as possible large responses, paging, or ordering. It conveys that it lists data without modifying it, but not additional side effects beyond annotation signals.

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?

Single sentence, uses imperative 'List all workspaces', presents all needed information with no wasted words.

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-only listing, it is justified by annotations and schema; no return protocol, and fields inferred. He does not tell how many, but enough to support.

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 JSON schema already describes the parameters with their patterns and optionality, but the description adds human labels 'ID', 'page token', and 'container ID'. However, no new semantics beyond the schema; necessary values are clear.

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 states the specific action ('List all workspaces'), the target resource ('in a container'), and the returned fields (IDs, names, and descriptions). It clearly separates it from other workspace-related operations like get_workspace_status.

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?

This is strictly a list operation with no contrast to alternatives. It says nothing about when to prefer this list-as-block over a get-single-workspace or other list tools, nor does it mention pagination or exclusions.

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