Workspace summary (account, signer, follow-ups, paths)

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool shows information, implying a read-only operation, but provides no details on side effects, permission requirements, or what happens when optional parameters are provided. The lack of output schema further obscures the behavior. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's impact.

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 two sentences long: the first efficiently lists the displayed information, and the second provides actionable usage guidance. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage context. However, the complete omission of parameter semantics and minimal behavioral detail (no annotations) leave gaps. It is minimally viable but not comprehensive.

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 schema has two optional parameters (accountAlias, chatScope) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain their purpose or how they affect the output. Despite listing the information shown, it fails to map parameters to behavior, leaving the agent without guidance on parameter usage.

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 shows specific workspace summary information: account connection, signer name, last inbox batch, due follow-ups, and local paths. The verb 'shows' and listed resources are precise, and the title 'Workspace summary' reinforces the purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'fetch' or 'followup_due' by providing a consolidated overview.

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 advises to use this tool first when unsure what to do next, providing clear context for its usage as an initial diagnostic step. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide explicit alternatives, which would make it more comprehensive.

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