get_workspace_status_summary

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

The description clearly states it is read-only and does not modify repository, git, release, or configuration state. Since no annotations are provided, the description alone carries this burden and does so effectively.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the core purpose and immediately address safety concerns. Every sentence earns its place with no waste.

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?

Despite having no output schema and only one parameter, the description lacks detail about what the summary contains, how to interpret it, and how it differs from similar tools. The agent cannot fully judge invocation suitability.

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 parameter workspaceId is not described at all. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain its purpose, optionality, or default behavior, leaving the agent without necessary semantic information.

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 'get' and resource 'workspace status summary', and clarifies it returns a sanitized summary. It distinguishes minimally from sibling tools by emphasizing it does not modify files, but does not explicitly differentiate from other summary tools like get_builder_report_summary.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions read-only but does not provide context for when it is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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