get_workspace

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, aligning with the description's 'Get' action. The description adds value by specifying that the response includes status flags, providing behavioral context beyond the annotation's safety profile. No contradictions.

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 very concise, consisting of two sentences that convey the purpose and added value (status flags). Every word earns its place with no unnecessary content.

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 absence of an output schema, the description partially covers return values by listing some status flags, but does not provide a complete picture of all fields returned. Lacks guidance on when to use relative to siblings, which are diverse.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides (workspace_id and origin are clear). The mention of status flags relates to output, not parameters.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'workspace (vendor project)', and specifies that it returns full detail including status flags like has_sent_files, has_signed_files, has_paid_payments. This differentiates it from siblings such as get_workspace_file or list_workspace_files.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_workspace_files or pay_invoice. The context suggests it's for retrieving a single workspace's details, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions are provided.

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