bootstrap_workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose what content is loaded and that recent changes are marked [new]. However, it does not disclose side-effect behavior, whether repeated calls behave differently, or any requirement to call it before other tools. The 'force' behavior is only in the schema, not the description.

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?

One tightly packed sentence, front-loaded with 'Session bootstrap' and then listing the payload elements. Every phrase earns its place, and there is no redundant filler.

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 simple bootstrap tool with no output schema and three optional parameters, the description gives a solid summary of what is returned. Yet it does not mention that calling it again during an active session may return minimal data unless force=true, and it does not orient the agent against adjacent context-loading tools. This is a reasonable but not fully complete description.

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 baseline is 3 and the schema already documents all three parameters clearly. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but it does not need to compensate for missing schema coverage.

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 ('loads') and enumerates distinct resources: workspace context, essence, notes refs, and a memory index tree with [new] markers. It clearly communicates what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with related sibling tools like get_current_workspace or load_more_context.

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 phrase 'Session bootstrap' implies this is the initial context-loading call, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus sibling tools such as load_more_context, load_turn_context, or get_current_workspace. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage timing.

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