app-workspaces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. The verbs 'list' and 'report' clearly communicate a non-destructive query behavior, and no side effects are hidden. It does not describe return format or ordering, but for a zero-parameter read tool this is not a serious omission.

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 two short, parallel clauses with no filler or redundant detail. It is front-loaded with the primary action and immediately understandable.

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 trivial zero-parameter query tool, the description covers the two things the agent needs to know: what it lists and what it reports. It does not specify output shape or whether the active workspace is separately highlighted, but the complexity is low enough that this is not a significant gap.

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 no parameters, and the schema is fully covering by vacuity. The 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies since no parameter descriptions are needed or possible.

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 two concrete behaviors: listing workspaces and reporting the active workspace. This distinguishes it from sibling workspace actions like app-workspace_set by focusing on read/query operations rather than modification.

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 intended usage is implied by the verbs 'list' and 'report,' but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. No alternatives such as app-workspace_set are mentioned.

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