list_workspaces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It states the operation is a read/list action, indicates the output includes aggregate status, and gives a concrete ID format expectation (`w17`). It does not mention pagination, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for that detail.

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 brief sentences with no fluff. The main listing semantics are front-loaded, and the structural ID convention is added in the second sentence.

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 zero-argument, read-only listing tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it covers what the tool returns, the form of identifiers, and when to use it. Nothing needed to invoke 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there are no input semantics to document. This is the baseline strong score for a no-argument tool; the description correctly focuses on the output and orientation value instead.

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 the exact resource ('List Herdr workspaces') and the precise returned contents: ids, labels, and aggregate agent status. This cleanly separates it from sibling tools like list_tabs, list_panes, and list_agents.

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 'Start here to orient in the session' gives an explicit when-to-call directive. It does not list alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but for an orientation-level listing tool that is a minor omission.

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