Workspace List Workspaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it auto-paginates to the last page, aggregates entries from every page, reports total only when Sigma sends it, and sets nextPage null. That is valuable disclosure for an agent that might otherwise assume a single-page result.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by tightly scoped pagination details. It is appropriately sized, though the return-key enumeration partially duplicates what the output schema already provides.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be exhaustively described, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description supplies the remaining critical context, auto-pagination and cursor/limit semantics, making it complete enough to call correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does explain both parameters: page resumes from a nextPage cursor and limit is the page size. It omits the default limit value and the relationship between cursor pagination and the claimed nextPage=null behavior is slightly muddled, keeping it from a 5.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "List all workspaces." That is sufficient to distinguish it from create/get/delete workspace siblings, though it does not explicitly name or route against any sibling list tool.

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 use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The description focuses entirely on pagination mechanics after the first sentence, leaving usage selection to inference from the name.

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