get_workspace

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully convey behavior. While it correctly implies a read-only operation with 'Get details', it fails to disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions. The description is minimal.

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 concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and immediately clear.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description is complete enough for an AI agent to understand its use. However, it could benefit from mentioning the expected return format (e.g., 'returns a workspace object with details'), which would slightly improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'workspace_id' described as 'Workspace slug or UUID'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'details of a workspace', and specifies 'subscription and settings' which clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_workspaces that return a list. This is specific and unambiguous.

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, such as list_workspaces for listing all workspaces or update_workspace for modifications. There is no mention of prerequisites like required permissions or workspace ownership.

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