set_workspace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a UI state change but does not mention side effects (e.g., does it reset panels? require permissions?). The action is simple, but more detail like 'changes the active workspace panel layout' would improve transparency.

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 sentence that includes examples and a reference to a related tool. No unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, how to determine valid values (via get_workspaces), and gives examples. No critical information is missing.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter description. The description adds value by providing example workspaces and referencing get_workspaces for discovery. This goes beyond the schema's basic label.

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 action ('Switch to a specific workspace layout') and the resource (workspace). It provides concrete examples ('Editing', 'Color', etc.) which clarifies the purpose. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_active_sequence or set_playhead_position.

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 explicitly says to use get_workspaces to see available options, providing guidance on how to check valid inputs. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use the tool, the purpose is narrow and obvious. No alternative tools for switching workspace exist in siblings.

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