onda_workspace_locate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It details the return shape and the meaning of 'mountedIn', including the null case. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but the absence of side effects is implied. Minor gaps like error handling or multiple matches prevent a 5.

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 purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundancy or fluff.

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 lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameter semantics, return shape, and field meaning. It lacks details on edge cases (e.g., multiple matches, error handling), but given the simplicity, it is reasonably complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that id, name, and rootPath are alternative lookup keys, and explains what the return value looks like for each. This exceeds the baseline.

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 'Find' and the resource 'workspace', specifying lookup by name, id, or rootPath. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'onda_workspace_list' by explicitly noting 'without listing them all'.

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 phrase 'without listing them all' indicates a targeted lookup use case, providing clear context for when to use this tool over a listing tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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