get_workspaces

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it retrieves workspaces, supports pagination (top/skip), offers format and detail options, and includes error handling for authentication and permissions. No hidden traits.

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 well-structured with sections (overview, usage, parameters, returns, examples, errors) but is slightly verbose. Every sentence adds value, so it earns a high score.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers usage, parameters, examples, and error handling comprehensively. An agent can confidently invoke the tool.

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 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains each parameter (top for max count, skip for pagination offset, format for response type, detail for level of detail) and provides examples.

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 clearly states it retrieves a list of PowerBI workspaces accessible to the service principal. It uses specific verbs ('Get list of') and distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on datasets, reports, etc.

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 description explicitly lists use cases (discover workspaces, find workspace ID, list all accessible) and provides error handling scenarios. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use but the context of sibling tools makes it clear.

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