identify_workspace_entity

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the basic purpose without disclosing what happens on failure, permissions needed, rate limits, or response structure. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 concise with three clear lines: purpose, argument explanation, and GAM pattern. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple nature (1 param, output schema), the description covers the basics but lacks behavioral details and usage context. It is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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 description adds useful meaning to the 'identifier' parameter by clarifying it accepts an email address or resource identifier, going beyond the schema's minimal title. With 0% schema description coverage, this compensation is valuable.

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 tool identifies a Workspace entity by email or ID, with explicit types (user, group, alias). This is specific and distinct from sibling tools which focus on auditing, permissions, or GAM commands.

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 provides a GAM pattern example but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search or lookup tools. No when-not-to-use or comparison to siblings is offered.

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