ask_cline_workspace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key non-obvious behavior: 'The worktree is always removed after the request.' This clarifies that side effects are contained in a disposable environment, which is valuable. It does not mention other potential behaviors like network access or code execution, but the lifecycle disclosure is strong.

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?

Two tightly written sentences, with the core purpose first and the essential disposal behavior second. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The description covers purpose and one behavioral trait, but with four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, an agent is left without guidance on parameter meaning, expected return value, or how this differs from ask_cline. Too much is left to inference for a complete tool definition.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explicitly define any of the four parameters. It indirectly hints that cwd refers to the Git workspace and prompt is the Cline request, but thinking and timeoutSeconds are completely unexplained. The description fails to compensate for the schema's silence.

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 states a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('a Git workspace'), and adds a mechanism ('through Cline in a disposable worktree') that distinguishes it from the sibling ask_cline. It is clear but not as explicit as naming the alternative or describing the exact outcome.

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 analyzing a Git workspace in a safe, throwaway context, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over ask_cline or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria or alternative routing is provided.

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