workspaces_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Get details', omitting whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, or what response is expected. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too sparse and could include more helpful context without becoming verbose.

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 no output schema and the tool's simple retrieval function, the description should indicate what 'details' are returned (e.g., properties of the workspace). It fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to understand the output.

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 coverage is 100% with documented parameters (accountId, containerId, workspaceId). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'Get details of a specific GTM workspace' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific GTM workspace'), clearly differentiating from sibling tools like workspaces_list or workspaces_create.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as workspaces_list for multiple workspaces, workspace_get_status for status, or workspace_quick_preview. The description does not specify any exclusions or prerequisites.

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