workspace_conf_get_status

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already informs the agent that this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns 'all keys/values' but does not disclose other behavioral traits (e.g., permissions required, response size). It does not contradict annotations.

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 that conveys the essential information without any unnecessary words. It is perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 that the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is adequately complete. It states what is returned ('full workspace configuration') but could be slightly more precise about the scope (e.g., whether it includes nested objects). However, with the output schema covering return values, the description suffices.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description has no need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies as it meets expectations for a parameterless tool.

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 ('Return') and resource ('full workspace configuration'), explicitly stating it returns all keys/values. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like workspace_conf_get_keys, which likely returns only keys.

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?

Although no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, the description's clarity and the sibling names (get_keys, set) imply that this tool is for retrieving the complete configuration, while get_keys is for a subset. The context is clear enough for an AI agent to differentiate.

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