workspace_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the core behavior (reports which prerequisite is missing) and the additional capability (client_id discovery). It implicitly indicates a read-only check, but does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior or behavior when ComfyUI is not running, which would push it to 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?

The description is three sentences total: a clear purpose statement, a brief explanation of prerequisites, and a usage directive. Every sentence carries necessary information with no waste.

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 zero-parameter diagnostic tool with an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, prerequisites, and recommended usage. It tells the agent what the workspace refers to, what conditions are needed, and how to use the results.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description logically explains the state being checked without needing parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check whether') and resource ('live ComfyUI workspace'), defining what the workspace is. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining it reports which prerequisite (bridge node/tab) is missing and can find client_id values, which is unique among the listed tools.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Call it before the other workspace_* tools when they fail' and 'to find client_id values when several tabs are open.' This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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