AppFlowy Cloud MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds important auth context ('authenticated user') given login/refresh siblings exist, implying prior authentication is required. However, it omits other behavioral details like pagination, caching, read-only safety confirmation, or return structure.

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 with zero waste. Information is front-loaded with the action verb, and 'for the authenticated user' efficiently establishes the security context without verbosity.

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?

Given zero parameters and simple list semantics, the description is appropriately complete. However, without an output schema, it could have briefly characterized the return value (e.g., 'returns workspace IDs and names') to fully prepare the agent for invocation.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, establishing a baseline of 4. The description appropriately does not introduce phantom parameters and the 'authenticated user' clause provides necessary context for the implicit auth token requirement.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' with clear resource 'workspaces' and scope 'for the authenticated user'. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like list_databases and list_rows by specifying the workspace resource level.

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?

While the description establishes the tool lists user-scoped workspaces, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_databases or hierarchical navigation patterns. The usage is implied by the resource name but not stated explicitly.

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