List workspaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description reinforces it while adding substantial behavioral detail: it reports the primary workspace, presence of .workspace-mcp/ state, and active change id when state.json exists. This goes beyond annotation information.

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?

Two efficient sentences; the first front-loads the operation and return fields, the second gives the usage context. No filler or repetition of schema information.

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 zero-parameter read-only enumeration tool with no output schema, the description fully specifies the output fields and the important primary-workspace/default behavior. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and the schema leaves nothing undocumented. The description still adds useful context by noting that other tools default to the primary workspace and that this listing is the discovery mechanism.

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?

States a specific read-only list operation with the resource ('named project workspaces served by this process') and enumerates the returned fields. It is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the file/state mutation siblings.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to call this tool first to discover workspace names and explains that every path or state tool accepts an optional workspace argument defaulting to primary. This gives direct when-to-use guidance for the surrounding toolset.

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