Switch workspace

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the crucial client-side gate that nothing is sent unless confirm: true and that there is no server-side dry run. That is real behavioral context an agent cannot get from the annotations. It stops short of describing side effects on the current session or tokens.

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?

Two tight sentences with the write/gate warning front-loaded after the action statement; every clause carries information. It is arguably too terse on outcomes, but nothing is wasted.

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 mutation with a nested body, no output schema, and a 67% coverage rate, the definition covers the safety gate but omits permissions required, what happens to existing credentials/session state, and what the successful response contains or how the preview is shaped.

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 67% and both confirm and idempotencyKey are already documented in the schema, including the preview behavior. The description's confirm sentence largely restates the schema, and workspaceId — the required nested field — gets no additional meaning anywhere. Baseline 3.

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?

"Switch workspace" names a specific verb and resource, and the description adds the underlying endpoint (POST /v1/auth/switch-workspace). It is clearly separable from siblings such as auth_me, auth_logout, and workspaces_create, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 confirm gate implies the calling convention (preview first, then execute), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when a workspace switch is appropriate versus, say, creating a workspace via workspaces_create, and no stated prerequisites.

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