warehouse_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that; it doesn't mention pagination, return shape, or potential caveats. Since the annotations carry the safety burden, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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 one short sentence with no filler. It front-loads the key information (action, resource, scope) and 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?

This is a low-complexity tool: one required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema, and read-only annotations. The description fully states what the tool does and where it operates. An agent has enough information to select and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%: workspaceId is documented as 'The workspace ID'. The description's phrase 'in a workspace' confirms the relationship but adds no new semantic detail. The schema already does the work, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 is precise: 'List all warehouses in a workspace' names a specific verb (List), a concrete resource (warehouses), and the scope (workspace). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like warehouse_get, warehouse_create, and warehouse_delete without needing to open their schemas.

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?

There is no explicit exclusion or named alternative, but the context is obvious: use this tool when you need to enumerate warehouses within a workspace, as opposed to retrieving a single warehouse with warehouse_get or modifying/deleting one. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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