get_available_workspaces

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'List' signals a non-mutating operation and 'available' adds a scoping qualifier, which is useful, but the description does not mention output format, authentication, or any limitations beyond availability.

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 redundant wording. Every word in 'List available workspace images.' earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description is nearly complete: it states the action and the resource. The only gap is that there is no output schema and the description does not specify what fields the returned images contain, but for this simple tool the gap is minor.

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 zero parameters and the description coverage is effectively 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add. The baseline of 4 applies because the tool takes no arguments.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a concrete resource ('available workspace images'), so an agent can tell it is a read-only catalog operation rather than a session-lifecycle mutation. It is clear, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools, so it stops short of the strongest differentiation.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not say this should be called before create_kasm_session to pick an image ID, nor does it mention any alternative tools. An agent must infer the intended context from the name and siblings.

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