get_workspace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully states the return contents (settings fields plus embedded documents), which is the key behavioral trait for a read tool, but says nothing about permissions, unknown-slug behavior, or payload size.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical field list is dense but earns its place by pre-announcing the payload. Nothing is wasted.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by naming what is returned, which is the main thing an agent needs for a simple single-parameter read tool. Only edge cases (missing workspace, auth) are absent.

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% for the single 'slug' parameter, and the description never explains it. 'One workspace's' weakly implies the parameter selects a workspace, but the format or source of the slug is undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one workspace's full settings') and enumerates the settings returned, so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It implicitly separates itself from list_workspaces by saying 'one', but never names the sibling explicitly.

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 on when to call this versus list_workspaces, ask_workspace, or update_workspace, and no prerequisites (e.g. needing a slug that already exists). Usage can only be inferred from the tool name.

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