get_workspaces_count

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 only adds 'with optional filtering,' but does not disclose the return format (e.g., bare integer vs object), authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal for read-only tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It clearly states the operation and a single qualifier.

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?

For a simple count tool, the description is adequate but has gaps: there is no output schema, so the return value type/format is not explicitly stated. It also omits any caveats about workspace visibility or filtering behavior beyond what the schema already covers.

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?

The schema fully describes the 'filter' parameter with example syntax (100% coverage). The description redundantly says 'optional filtering,' adding no new meaning beyond the schema's required-field list (zero required params). Baseline 3 applies.

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 returns a count of workspaces, with optional filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_workspaces (which lists details) and get_workspace (singular fetch).

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 implies usage (use when you need a total count) but does not explicitly mention when-not-to-use or alternatives. There is no guidance about choosing this over list_workspaces or search_workspaces.

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