create_workspace

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, and open-world. The description adds valuable behavioral context: slug auto-generation from name and return fields (id, name, slug). No contradictions with annotations.

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 two sentences: first states the main purpose, second adds key behavioral details and return values. Every sentence is necessary, no redundancy, and the primary action is front-loaded.

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 an output schema and 5 params fully described, the description covers the core behavior: creation, isolation purpose, slug generation, and return fields. It is sufficient for agent understanding, though it could mention that name is required (already in schema).

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description only adds behavioral detail for the slug parameter (auto-generation). Baseline is 3 per guidelines for high schema coverage, and the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema.

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 creates a workspace to isolate resources, API keys, and team members. It specifies the action ('create'), the resource ('workspace'), and the purpose, distinguishing it from update_workspace and other creation 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?

The description implies usage for creating new workspaces but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any when-not-to-use conditions. It does not mention other creation tools like create_api_key or create_collection.

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