Opentoonz Create Workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does meaningful work: it discloses idempotency, the folder layout created, and that the shared OpenToonz 'stuff' tree is intentionally NOT copied per workspace. It omits error/failure behavior and naming constraints, but the core behavioral traits of the operation are surfaced.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb and the key behavioral trait (idempotent) in parentheses, then a compact explanation of layout. 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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description adequately covers the folder contents and shared-tree behavior. Only the parameter contract is left unexplained, a minor gap for such a simple, single-parameter tool.

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 0% for the single 'name' parameter, and the description does nothing to compensate, giving no hint about naming rules, allowed characters, or uniqueness. The agent must guess what a valid workspace name looks like from the schema alone.

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 pairs a specific verb ("Create") with a specific resource ("workspace folder") and clarifies what a workspace contains (drawings/, render/, scripts/), which separates it cleanly from siblings like opentoonz_list_workspaces and opentoonz_delete_workspace. It does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings, but the intent is unmistakable.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer that a workspace must exist before drawings/render/scripts work, but the description never states when to create one versus reusing an existing workspace (list_workspaces) or how it relates to scene creation. No explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance is given.

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