get_workspace_hierarchy

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, lowering the burden. The description adds behavioral detail: it returns hierarchy up to a configurable depth, explains depth semantics (1=folders only, 2=folders+lists, 3=+sublists), and notes the default space. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a sentence about return value and use case, and a clean two-parameter Arg list. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 read-only browse tool with 2 optional parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and default behavior. It is fully sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: space_id ('Space to browse. Defaults to the configured DEVELOPMENT_SPACE_ID') and max_depth ('How deep to recurse' with explicit level meanings). This goes beyond the schema's bare type/default definitions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Browse') and resource ('workspace folder/list hierarchy'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_list_tasks or get_sprint_tasks. It also states the return ('folders and lists') and the main use case (discover list IDs).

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?

Provides explicit context for when to use: 'Use this to discover list IDs for creating tasks or browsing backlogs.' It also explains default behavior for space_id but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, so it's clear but not a full when/when-not guide.

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