workspace_trace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the return is a log but does not indicate read-only nature, permissions, or response structure. With an output schema available, some context is provided, but the description lacks necessary behavioral traits.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant words. The key verb 'Get' is front-loaded, and the parenthetical provides immediate clarification. It earns its place with no wasted text.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the return structure is covered, but the description fails to explain the two parameters or provide usage context. For a simple tool with no annotations, more detail is needed for an agent to use 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain what 'domain' and 'trace_id' mean or how to obtain them. While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no additional meaning beyond those names.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'workspace trace', explicitly calling it a 'full agent execution log'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like workspace_bundle and workspace_surface, which deal with different aspects of workspaces.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like code_workspace_get_run or workspace_bundle might be similar, but no exclusions or context are given to help the agent choose.

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