inventory__list_workspaces

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering safety, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: results include id, name, ungrouped, and host_count; workspace names can be duplicated; and a specific permission is required. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 efficiently organized: purpose first, followed by usage cues, result shape, ID preference, and permission requirement. Every sentence adds practical value with no redundancy.

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 read-only annotation, fully documented parameters, and an output schema, the description covers the key operational details: what the tool returns, when to use it, how to reference results later, and required permissions. No critical guidance is missing.

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 all six parameters and their defaults. The tool description itself adds minimal parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable under the high-coverage baseline.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pairing ('List Inventory workspaces') and clarifies the domain term ('console UI name for Inventory groups'). It also lists the result fields, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools like inventory__get_workspace.

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 explicitly states when to call the tool ('whenever the user asks to list, show, or get workspaces') and provides practical guidance like not inventing workspace names and preferring IDs over names. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for single-workspace lookup, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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