workiva_get_workspace

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Get workspace details' without disclosing permissions, error handling, or the nature of the returned data. Behavioral traits are largely implied.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the core purpose in one sentence. The 'Args' line is redundant with the schema but adds negligible bulk. No wasted words, though it could be more substantive.

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 one-parameter read operation with an output schema available, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage context and behavioral details, making it incomplete for an agent needing to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 description repeats the parameter name ('workspace_id: Workspace ID') with no additional meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate by explaining the parameter's format, constraints, or purpose.

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 'Get workspace details' clearly states the tool's function: retrieving a single workspace's information by ID. It distinguishes itself from list_workspaces by targeting a specific workspace, though it does not explicitly mention sibling alternatives.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like workiva_list_workspaces or workiva_get_organization. There is no context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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