get_cross_workspace_impact

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by stating 'Read-only' and detailing the output structure: 'Returns JSON: { workspace, public_api, consumed_by, depends_on, cross_workspace_edges }.' No contradictions.

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 paragraph of three sentences that efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and output. No redundancy or unnecessary information.

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?

Given the tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description provides all necessary context: purpose, when to use, behavior, and return structure. It is complete for a simple tool.

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 one parameter 'workspace' with description 'Workspace name to analyze.' Schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add additional semantics beyond confirming the parameter's role ('given workspace'). Baseline 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: 'Show which workspaces are affected by changes in a given workspace.' It specifies the action (analyze impact) and the resource (workspace), and distinguishes from siblings like get_change_impact by focusing on cross-workspace edges and public API surface.

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 provides a clear usage guideline: 'Use before modifying shared code in a monorepo.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is specific enough.

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