List Spaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context by stating the result is scoped to spaces 'visible to current user,' which signals authorization filtering. It does not describe pagination or return details, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action, then adds genuinely useful drill-down and integration context. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 list operation with one optional parameter and no required inputs, the description is largely complete. It identifies the result scope, downstream usage of space IDs, and related navigation tools. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the clarity of 'list spaces,' though return field details are not specified.

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% for the single verbosity parameter, including its enum values and default. The description does not add extra explanation of verbosity, but that is acceptable because the schema already fully documents it. Baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List spaces visible to current user.' It clearly distinguishes this listing tool from detail and drill-down siblings like kaiten_get_space and kaiten_list_boards, so an agent can immediately understand its role.

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 gives concrete downstream guidance: use kaiten_get_space for detail, kaiten_list_boards for boards, kaiten_list_space_users for members, and mentions other tools that consume space IDs. It implies this is the entry point for space-based workflows, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name a direct alternative for listing spaces.

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