List Workspaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds that the tool returns tenant_id/type/role/name, which is mildly useful, but that information is largely duplicated by the output schema and it says nothing about ordering, empty results, or pagination for what could be a multi-tenant listing.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource and parenthetically listing the returned fields. No filler or redundancy.

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?

This is a simple, zero-required-parameter read tool with a full output schema and complete annotations, so the description need not explain return values or safety. It is nearly complete; the only gap is that it gives no hint about the workspace/tenant context an agent needs before calling workspace-scoped siblings.

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?

Only one parameter (output_format) exists and schema description coverage is 100%, including a full enum documentation for text vs json. The description says nothing about output_format, so it does not compensate or add meaning — but the schema already carries that burden, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List available cloud workspaces') and even names the returned fields (tenant_id, type, role, name), so the agent knows exactly what it will get. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from the many other listing siblings (list_directory, bm_list, list_memory_projects) in terms of which resource domain it covers.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. authentication or tenant context), and no exclusions. The agent must infer that this is the entry-point enumeration for workspaces before calling other workspace-scoped tools.

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