List the workspaces of the account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond that: the result set composition (personal workspace conditionally included, invited teams), role inclusion, and a deterministic ordering (join order, matching the app's workspace switcher).

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then downstream usage, then ordering. Mostly tight, though the aside about a project's workspace plan is slightly tangential, keeping it just below maximal economy.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers scope, ordering semantics, and downstream id usage, and annotations cover the safety profile — an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 limit and cursor are fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameter syntax or formats, which is the correct baseline when the schema carries the burden.

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 states precisely what the tool returns (every workspace the account belongs to, including personal and invited teams, with the role held there) and implicitly separates it from project-oriented siblings by explaining the workspace/project relationship. An agent can tell it apart from list_projects without opening schemas.

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?

It gives concrete forward guidance — pass an id from here as workspaceId to create_project or list_projects — which tells the agent why and when to call it. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use or alternative-listing guidance, but the context is clear.

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