List spaces

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the output includes a reference for list_pages_in_space and that the scope is the configured wiki. It does not mention pagination, ordering, or output shape, but for a simple list operation this is acceptable though not thorough.

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 short sentences communicate the core function, the connection to a sibling tool, and the intended usage context with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter read-only listing tool, the description plus schema covers what an agent needs: what is listed, the output's purpose, and how to control the result count. A full return-value description is not necessary given the simple nature, though a bit more on output format would make it complete.

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 schema already documents the sole limit parameter, including its default and bounds. The description adds no parameter-specific details, which matches the baseline of 3 for well-covered schemas.

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 names a specific verb and resource: listing the spaces of the configured wiki. It also distinguishes itself by explaining that the result provides the reference needed for list_pages_in_space, which separates it from sibling tools like list_wikis and search_pages.

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 instruction 'Use this to orient yourself before browsing' gives clear contextual guidance on when to call it. It does not explicitly describe when not to use it or contrast it with list_wikis, but the purpose is concrete enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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