slack_list_workspaces

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

Annotations cover read-only and open-world, and the description adds real context beyond them: it discloses that it performs an auth.test call and that no extra scopes are required, which tells the agent about permission requirements. It stops short of describing failure behavior for invalid tokens.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the primary action and parenthetically qualifies the verification behavior — no filler.

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?

With no parameters and an existing output schema (so return values need not be explained), the description supplies enough to call it correctly. Minor gap: no hint about what aliases look like or what happens when a token is invalid.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline for a no-param tool 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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('List configured workspace aliases') plus a secondary verification function ('verify token identities'), which no sibling tool covers. It is clearly distinguishable from the message/channel/file siblings, though the dual purpose (aliases vs. token verification) slightly blurs the primary action.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent can infer this is a discovery/setup call before other Slack operations — but the description never says when to reach for it versus, say, slack_find_user or slack_channel_info, nor any preconditions.

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