check_workspace_deletion

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by saying 'Changes nothing. Read-only.' It adds useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: the preview shows which stores would move to the Default workspace and which members would have assignments revoked. It does not cover permissions or rate limits, but those gaps are minor for a dry-run tool.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the dry-run purpose and affected entities. The trailing '[#bcfd4e]' token is extraneous and slightly harms structure, but the core text is efficient.

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 one-parameter, read-only preview tool, the description is complete enough: it states the action, scope, non-effect, and the categories of information the preview surfaces. Annotations cover the safety profile, and the schema covers the only parameter.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the workspace_uuid parameter is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning or usage syntax beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Dry run: preview deleting a workspace'. It explicitly scopes the preview to agency/Enterprise workspaces and distinguishes itself from the destructive sibling delete_workspace by stating 'Changes nothing. Read-only.'

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 phrase 'Dry run: preview deleting a workspace' clearly establishes the use case as pre-deletion validation. However, it does not explicitly name delete_workspace as the alternative action or state when not to use this preview, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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