List Workspaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation by stating 'list all... with their metadata' and lists returned fields. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or behavior with large result sets beyond the limit parameter.

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?

Three sentences that are front-loaded with purpose, followed by output details and use cases. No superfluous language; every sentence adds value.

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?

For a listing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, output fields, and usage context. It could mention pagination or ordering defaults more explicitly, but the limit parameter and sortBy enum cover these.

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% with both parameters described. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (limit and sortBy with defaults and descriptions), so it meets the baseline.

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 'List all available test workspaces with their metadata,' providing a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get-test-workspace' (which retrieves a single workspace) by emphasizing 'all' workspaces.

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 lists use cases ('discovering existing workspaces, understanding workspace organization, and managing workspace lifecycle'), giving context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like 'get-test-workspace' for a single workspace.

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