get_clients

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It fails to disclose authentication needs, behavior when workspace_id is null (all workspaces?), or pagination. The bare statement offers minimal transparency.

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 (six words) and front-loaded. While succinct, it sacrifices completeness; a bit more detail could be added without harming conciseness. Overall, no wasted words.

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?

With an output schema present, missing return details are acceptable. However, the description does not clarify how the workspace_id parameter affects the results (all clients vs. filtered). For a list tool with siblings, this creates ambiguity. Adequate but not complete.

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 single parameter 'workspace_id' has 0% schema description coverage and the description adds no explanation about its effect (e.g., default null vs. required). Since schema coverage is low, compensation is needed but absent.

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 it retrieves all clients within a workspace, distinguishing it from the singular 'get_client' sibling. However, it does not specify the return format (e.g., list or array), so nuance is missing.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_client (single client) or other list tools. The description does not mention scenarios where workspace_id is null or required.

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