list_workspaces

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits on its own. It discloses that the operation requires an authenticated user and filters to memberships, and the Args section explains pagination behavior via 'limit' and 'next_token.' While it doesn't explicitly say the operation is read-only or mention rate limits, the verb 'List' strongly implies a non-mutating operation, and the disclosed constraints exceed a minimal 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?

The description is extremely concise: one sentence for purpose followed by two short parameter definitions. It is front-loaded with the purpose, contains no redundant information, and every sentence earns its place.

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 list tool with two optional parameters and a provided output schema, the description covers the purpose, authentication context, membership filtering, and parameter semantics. The existing output schema handles return-value details, so nothing essential 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 input schema has 0% description coverage and only provides types and defaults. The description compensates fully by defining 'limit' as 'Max results to return' and 'next_token' as 'Pagination token from a previous response,' giving the agent clear semantic guidance for both parameters.

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 opens with 'List all workspaces the authenticated user is a member of,' which uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('workspaces') and adds a clear scope (membership). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_rooms and list_murals_in_room, which target different resources.

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 description conveys a clear usage context: call this to enumerate all workspaces visible to the authenticated user. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for related resources, so it does not earn a 5.

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