base_wework_list_departmentsList all departments in Base Wework to view organizational structure and reference department IDs for employee management.
Lấy danh sách tất cả phòng ban (departments) trên Base Wework.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| page_id | No | ||
| access_token | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action. It does not mention pagination (despite limit and page_id), access-token handling, or any side effects. It is not misleading, but it carries almost no behavioral detail beyond the bare operation.
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 sentence with no filler; the verb and object are front-loaded and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name. It earns its place.
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?
While an output schema exists and can describe the return shape, the description leaves pagination/auth behavior and the meaning of the params to inference. For a 3-param tool with no annotations, this is not complete enough for reliable invocation, especially because 'all' departments may require paging via limit/page_id.
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% and the description adds no meaning to any of the three parameters. An agent must infer that limit controls page size, page_id controls pagination, and access_token is likely an authentication token from parameter names alone.
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 Vietnamese description clearly states a specific action — 'Lấy danh sách tất cả phòng ban' (get list of all departments) — tied to the Base Wework resource. The plural 'all departments' distinguishes it from sibling get_department, which implies a single department lookup.
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 phrase 'tất cả' (all) implies this is the tool to use when a complete department list is needed, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no alternative tool is named. Usage is only implied, not spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.