Discover Local Workspace

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by stating the tool does not follow symlinks and produces a bounded view, which is behavioral context not present in annotations. However, it does not describe the output structure, though output schema is absent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and carries no filler. It conveys scoping and exclusion in minimal words, earning 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?

Given the complexity of four parameters (one required) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain parameter roles, return format, or any usage examples. While annotations cover safety, the lack of parameter semantics leaves a significant gap for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the absence of parameter documentation. It does not mention any of the four parameters (workspace, maxDepth, extensions, maxEntries) or explain their meaning, defaults, or constraints. An agent cannot infer how to set these parameters correctly from the description alone.

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 the tool lists a bounded safe workspace view and root package scripts, with an explicit exclusion of symlink following. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from siblings like search_local_workspace, which implies searching rather than simple listing.

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 implies the tool is for initial exploration ('discover', 'bounded'), but it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or conditions for choosing this over sibling tools like search_local_workspace or execute_local_code_task. Usage context is only implicit.

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