list-workspaces

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 mentions authentication ('authenticated user') but lacks details on rate limits, pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), error handling, or response format. This is inadequate for a tool with parameters and no output schema.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently conveys the essential information without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and parameters with implied behavior (e.g., pagination), the description is incomplete. It should explain the return format, authentication requirements, or error cases to adequately support tool invocation in context.

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 schema fully documents the optional 'limit' and 'offset' parameters. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as default values or usage examples, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('List') and resource ('workspaces'), specifying that it returns all workspaces accessible to the authenticated user. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-workspace' (which likely retrieves a single workspace) or 'list-workspace-boards' (which focuses on boards within a workspace), missing explicit sibling distinction.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios like initial setup, user access audits, or comparisons with 'get-workspace' for single workspace retrieval, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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