spaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavioral distinction between the two modes (list vs detail). The verb 'get' inherently implies a read operation with no side effects, and no further behavioral traits are necessary for this simple tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no redundant information. Every word 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It could mention return format or explicitly confirm read-only behavior, but for a straightforward get/list tool, the provided context is complete enough.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with both space_id and workspace_id already described. The description adds the note about omitting space_id, but this duplicates the schema's description. No extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the resource (spaces) and the action (get), and distinguishes between listing all spaces and retrieving a specific one. This differentiates from sibling tools like lists_list_in_space which operate on lists within spaces.

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?

It explains when to omit space_id (list all) and when to provide it (details of a specific space), giving clear context for use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the two modes are well-defined.

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