Get workspace info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'GET /ws' and 'for current token', indicating it's a read operation, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or any potential side effects. With zero annotations, this is insufficient.

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 with no fluff. It front-loads the HTTP method and purpose, making it quick to parse. Every word 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?

Despite having no parameters and no output schema, the description fails to elaborate on what 'workspace info' includes (e.g., name, ID, members, settings). The tool is simple but the description is too minimal to fully guide the agent on the return value.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no meaning beyond the tool name, saying essentially the same thing. For a no-parameter tool, a baseline of 4 is appropriate only if the description adds value; here it does not, thus a 3.

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's purpose: 'Get workspace info for current token'. The verb 'Get' and resource 'workspace info' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings which are mostly CRUD operations on other entities (contacts, deals, tasks, etc.).

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 usage when workspace info is needed but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion criteria or comparisons with sibling tools are given, leaving the agent to infer context.

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