List workspaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool lists workspaces, implying a read-only operation with no side effects. While it doesn't explicitly mention 'read-only' or lack of side effects, the operation is inherently non-destructive and the description gives no indication of hidden behavior.

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 concise, two sentences, and directly to the point. It includes the essential information without any redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 description tells the agent what the tool does, what it returns (display name and slug), and how to use that output with other tools. This is sufficient for a simple listing operation with no output schema defined.

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 tool has zero parameters, so no parameter explanations are needed. The description's mention of output fields (display name and slug) indirectly clarifies what the tool returns, satisfying the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 the tool's function: listing all AnythingLLM workspaces and returning their display name and slug. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_auth, list_documents, and query_workspace.

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 provides guidance by stating 'Use a name or slug from here with the other tools,' which tells the agent how to utilize the output. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools for situations where this tool is not appropriate, though the zero-parameter simplicity makes misuse unlikely.

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