gather-workspace-data

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

Discloses partial data behavior: 'Returns partial data if workspacePath does not exist or is not readable; missing items are represented as null or empty collections.' Also states failure conditions: 'Fails if the workspacePath is not an absolute path or the directory cannot be accessed.' No annotations to contradict.

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 well-structured and efficient, starting with a one-line summary, then detailing returned data, usage instructions, and behavior. It avoids redundancy, though it is slightly long due to the extensive list of returned fields; each field 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?

Given the complexity of the tool (returns many data points) and no output schema, the description fully enumerates all returned items and covers edge cases (partial data, failure modes). No gaps in what the agent needs to know.

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 100% for the single parameter, providing an absolute path example. The tool description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, which is already adequate. Baseline score 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Fetch a structured snapshot of a mobile app project's workspace.' It enumerates the specific data returned (package.json, metro config, etc.), and distinguishes itself from siblings, which are mostly device interaction and debugging 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?

Explicitly tells when to use (inspect project configuration) and when not to: 'DO NOT RUN THIS TOOL IF YOU ARE THE MAIN AGENT AND THIS TASK CAN BE DELEGATED TO A SUBAGENT.' Provides a clear usage sequence: 'If you are a subagent... run this as the first step.' Also recommends follow-up tools (Read/Glob/Grep).

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