Find Part Studios by name

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the workspace scope and filtering behavior, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or failure behavior; for a simple list tool this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no fluff; it states the action, scope, and optional behavior in a compact way.

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 read-only list tool, the description plus fully covered schema and readOnlyHint give an agent everything needed to call it appropriately. No output schema is present, but 'List' reasonably implies the return value.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds little semantic value beyond the schema, simply restating workspace scope and substring filtering.

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 resource ('Part Studios'), and scopes it to a workspace with an optional name-substring filter. This makes it clearly distinct from general element listing and part-listing siblings.

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?

It states the context clearly: use it to list Part Studios in a given workspace, optionally filtered by a name substring. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the use case is unambiguous.

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