Automatically selects the appropriate VS Code workspace for AI agents to interact with code projects through the Model Context Protocol.
Automatically select the most appropriate VS Code workspace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It states 'automatically select' but does not explain the selection criteria (e.g., based on current files, history, or heuristics), nor does it clarify whether the tool changes the current workspace or merely suggests one. The lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about side effects or output format.
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 concise at one sentence with no redundant words. However, it could be restructured to include a brief note on selection logic or output without significantly increasing length.
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 tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should provide enough context for correct invocation. It fails to describe the selection mechanism, the effect on the environment, or how the result is returned. This is insufficient for reliable use among sibling workspace tools.
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?
There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, baseline is 4 for zero parameters. However, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema; it does not explain what the tool returns or any implicit input. Thus a score of 3 reflects adequate but not enhanced semantics.
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 tool selects a VS Code workspace automatically. However, it lacks specificity on what 'most appropriate' means and does not fully distinguish from sibling tools like detect_vscode_workspaces or set_workspace. The verb 'select' and resource 'workspace' are clear.
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 is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as list_workspaces or set_workspace. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or when automatic selection is preferred over manual choice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.