GPT Commander

ide_apply_workspace_edit

Apply atomic VS Code workspace edits with preview summaries for safe, reviewed IDE modifications.

Instructions

Apply a VS Code WorkspaceEdit (atomic) with a preview summary

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>",
      "edit": "<edit>"
    },
    "name": "ide_apply_workspace_edit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`edit`	Yes
`previewOnly`	No
`workspaceId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral impact. It mentions 'atomic' and 'preview summary' which hint at transactional behavior and output, but it does not explain side effects, required workspace state, or error conditions. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is front-loaded and contains no fluff. However, it is terse to the point of underspecification, though this is more a completeness concern than a style one. It earns its place but could be expanded in a structured way.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a non-trivial tool with a nested object and multiple parameters, yet the description provides only a basic action statement. It lacks details about the edit format, the meaning of previewOnly, and what the preview summary contains. The absence of annotations and output schema makes this description insufficient for reliable use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (workspaceId, edit, previewOnly). The structure of the nested 'edit' object is entirely undocumented, so the agent cannot infer how to construct a valid edit request.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool applies a VS Code WorkspaceEdit, with an atomic operation and preview summary. It distinguishes from general edit tools like edit_block by referencing the WorkspaceEdit type, though it could be more explicit about what that entails.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as edit_block or write_file. No context or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision support.

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