configure_workspace_list

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

The description adds little beyond the annotations. The '[Write]' tag merely echoes readOnlyHint=false. It does not disclose side effects, overwrite behavior, permission requirements, or failure semantics. Since annotations already cover the safety profile, the description should add context but does not.

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 that front-loads the action. No filler or redundant text beyond the '[Write]' tag, which is acceptable. It is appropriately sized for the tool.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not mention expected outcomes, error conditions, or how parameters like 'query' and 'columns' affect the list view. The schema covers parameter names, but the description leaves contextual gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are described in the input schema. The description itself does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Add or update') on a specific resource ('list view in an agent workspace'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_workspace or get_workspace. The verb and resource are unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where another tool (e.g., create_workspace) would be appropriate. The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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