f_set_workspace

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent=true and destructive=false. The description adds context about cache updates and reindex but does not detail potential side effects like cache invalidation or file system changes.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, directory/cache effect, and reindex option. Could mention path validation but it's sufficient.

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% so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'optionally triggers a full reindex' for the reindex parameter but adds no new meaning beyond 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 action ('Changes the current workspace path at runtime'), specifies the resource ('workspace path'), and explains the effects ('updates search directory and cache, optionally triggers reindex'). It is distinct from sibling 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 includes 'Useful for multi-project workflows,' providing some context but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor comparison to alternatives.

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