workspace_create

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds context about required permissions and the mechanism (creating local folder or git repo). No contradictions with annotations. Could be more explicit about overwriting existing aliases, but overall adds value beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose and mechanism, exclusion, requirements. No wasted words, all information front-loaded. Efficient and easy to parse.

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?

While the description covers purpose, exclusions, and requirements, it does not describe the return value or success behavior. Given no output schema, the agent may need to know what the tool returns upon success. This is a minor gap for a creation tool.

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?

With 60% schema description coverage, the description adds context for parameters like kind (via 'folder or git'), root ('allowed-root alias from workspace_list'), and alias (with stdio/local guidance). It does not mention setDefault, but overall provides useful semantics beyond the 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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'remote HTTP/OAuth workspace alias', specifying the mechanism of creating a local folder or git repo under an allowed root. It distinguishes from sibling tools like workspace_list and workspace_get by focusing on creation, and explicitly contrasts with stdio/local access.

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 states when not to use the tool ('Not for stdio/local provider path access') and lists required permissions (LLM_GATEWAY_WORKSPACE_ADMIN=1, OAuth scope workspace:admin). The alias parameter description also provides guidance for stdio/local callers to avoid workspace tools.

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