get_workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and identifier, omitting details like error handling (e.g., behavior on missing ID), permissions, or rate limits. For a read operation, more transparency on expected outcomes would be beneficial.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 has an output schema and only one parameter, the description sufficiently covers the essentials: retrieving a specific workspace by ID. No further details are necessary for a simple getter.

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 0% description coverage for the parameter, so the description adds value by specifying 'numeric ID', clarifying the parameter's role. However, it does not provide additional constraints or format details beyond the schema's integer type.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'a single CDV workspace', and the identifying mechanism 'by its numeric ID'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_workspaces (multiple) and create_workspace (creation).

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 implies use when a single workspace is needed by ID, which is clear. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for listing) or mention alternatives, but for a simple getter, the context is sufficient.

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