agent_backendsRetrieve deterministic descriptors of available agent backends for a workspace, returning fresh availability to ensure accurate tool selection.
Return deterministic descriptors with fresh availability for a workspace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspace | Yes | Reference to exactly one durable workspace identity. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and repeatability profile is covered. The description's 'deterministic descriptors' echoes idempotence, while 'fresh availability' adds some behavioral context about current state, but it does not disclose edge cases or workspace identity requirements.
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 filler; every word contributes meaning. The description is appropriately short for a simple read-only listing tool with rich structured metadata.
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?
With one required parameter, complete annotations, and an output schema available, the description covers the essential operational context. The main gap is the absence of usage guidance, but the structured metadata compensates enough to make the tool invocable and understandable.
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 100%, and the workspace parameter is documented as 'Reference to exactly one durable workspace identity.' The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 title clearly names the resource ('Agent Backends') and the description provides a verb ('Return') and scope ('for a workspace'), so the core action is knowable. However, 'deterministic descriptors' is abstract and the description does not explicitly distinguish this from conceptually related siblings like agent_status or agent_list.
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?
There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of sibling tools. 'For a workspace' provides minimal context but not a decision rule or boundary for appropriate use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.