get_space_custom_fields

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies a read-only list operation but does not disclose any side effects, security considerations, or limitations like pagination. It is minimally transparent, but not contradictory.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that immediately convey the action and purpose. No wasted words; it is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists the returned fields (ids, names, types, configuration). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool returns, though additional details like pagination could be mentioned.

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 only parameter 'space_id' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's description, so this dimension meets the baseline.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'custom fields at the Space level', and the returned attributes (ids, names, types, configuration). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_folder_custom_fields or get_list_custom_fields by specifying the scope 'Space level' and 'Space-wide fields'.

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 includes the explicit usage direction 'Use to discover Space-wide fields.' This tells the agent when to use this tool, but it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or mention alternatives, though the use case is clear among siblings.

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