list_spaces

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function without mentioning any side effects, permissions, pagination behavior, or return format. Since it's a read-only listing operation, it may be safe, but the description offers no extra behavioral context beyond the action itself.

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, compact sentence with no redundancy. It fronts the action ('List') and specifies the scope ('all spaces in the Kaiten workspace'), making it highly efficient and immediately actionable.

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 zero-parameter, zero-annotation tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. An agent knows what to call and why, and the absence of parameters simplifies usage. However, it does not explicitly indicate the return type (e.g., an array of space objects), which, while implied, could be clearer given no output schema exists.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty (100% coverage). There is nothing to explain, and the description aligns perfectly with the schema. The baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies, as the description adds no unnecessary detail.

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 lists all spaces in the Kaiten workspace. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (spaces), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_space (which fetches a single space) and create/update/delete operations. No ambiguity exists.

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 when the agent needs a full list of spaces, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. For a simple listing operation, this implied guidance is minimally acceptable, but it lacks explicit routing.

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