Create a workspace

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

Annotations already declare the tool is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds the ownership detail and implies the creation side effect. For a simple create operation, this covers the key behavioral aspects, though it could briefly mention rate limits or default permissions.

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?

Two short sentences, the first states the action and owner, the second gives a conditional usage hint. No fluff, perfectly front-loaded, and every word contributes to clarity.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no nested objects, no output schema), the description, together with the rich annotations and full schema coverage, provides enough context for an agent to use it correctly. It even includes a conditional usage hint that preempts common errors.

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% for both 'name' and 'description', so the schema already explains the parameters. The tool description does not add extra context (e.g., validation rules, format); this meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 starts with 'Create a new workspace' — a specific verb and resource — and adds ownership context ('owned by the authenticated user'). It is immediately clear what the tool does and it does not risk being confused with any sibling tool, as no other workspace-creation tool exists.

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 sentence 'Use this if list_my_workspaces returns none' gives an explicit condition and names the alternative tool. This directly tells the agent when to invoke this tool versus relying on a list operation, which is exactly what a high-quality usage guideline should do.

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