Bootstrap a workspace and owner key

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the write nature is known. The description adds real value by explaining the two-phase confirm gate and that there is no server-side dry run, but it says nothing about permissions required, whether the created owner key or workspace can be revoked, or what the preview contains.

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 short sentences with zero filler. The resource and endpoint come first, and the safety-critical confirm constraint follows immediately.

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 three-parameter creation tool with a nested but trivial body and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, endpoint, and the execution gate. It could say more about the returned owner key or permission requirements, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly 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 coverage is 67%, so a baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces the confirm parameter's meaning and adds the 'no server-side dry run' nuance not present in the schema; it does not explain the nested body.name requirements or idempotencyKey behavior, which are left to the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource — 'Bootstrap a workspace and owner key' — and pins the endpoint (POST /v1/workspaces). It even discloses a non-obvious side effect (an owner key is created alongside the workspace), but it never names a sibling or condition that distinguishes it from other workspace/auth operations.

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?

Usage is only implied by the purpose: an agent can infer you call this to create a workspace. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement, no mention of prerequisites such as authentication or existing workspace limits, and no pointer to alternatives like auth_switchWorkspace or invites_create.

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