workspace_get_capsule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the section layout of the returned capsule and the notable side effect that create=true writes a new capsule from a template, which is genuinely useful. It omits what happens when the capsule is absent and create=false, whether creation is idempotent or destructive, and any auth requirement implied by the token 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the returned structure, with no filler. The conditional clause is attached where it matters most.

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?

It conveys the shape of the return value, which matters since there is no output schema, and flags the one write-capable branch. Against five undocumented parameters and no annotations, though, it leaves key invocation questions (token, agent, missing-capsule behavior) unanswered.

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 0% across five parameters, yet the description explains only create=true semantics. slug format, agent, title, and especially token (an auth-looking parameter) are left entirely undocumented in both schema and prose, so an agent cannot tell what to pass or why.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read a project capsule") and defines what the capsule contains (State / Decisions (locked) / Next / Session log), which distinguishes it from the context tools in the sibling list. It does not explicitly name workspace_update_capsule as the write-side counterpart, but the read framing is unambiguous.

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 when to use it (reading shared structured memory) and adds one conditional behavior (create=true). It gives no explicit guidance versus workspace_get_context or workspace_update_capsule, and no prerequisites such as whether a token or existing capsule is needed.

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