Get Test Workspace

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes a read-only retrieval but does not disclose potential side effects, prerequisites (e.g., workspace existence), or performance implications. Basic transparency, no contradictions.

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?

Single sentence (20 words) is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the main action. Could be slightly tighter by avoiding repetition of 'workspace', but overall efficient.

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?

No output schema, so description explains return values (metadata, files with contents, Jest config). Covers input and output adequately for a simple retrieval tool. Missing error conditions or access requirements, but complete enough.

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 provides full coverage for the single parameter with description 'ID of the workspace to inspect'. The tool description adds context about what the tool returns but does not add new meaning to the parameter itself. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action (retrieve) and the specific resource (test workspace contents and metadata). It distinguishes from siblings by detailing what is returned: workspace metadata, file list with contents, and Jest configuration. No ambiguity.

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?

Implied usage: inspect a test workspace. No explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings like 'list-workspaces' or 'get-test-run-details'. Lacks exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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