appflowy_get_workspace_usage

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It merely states the tool gets storage usage, but does not mention whether it is idempotent, read-only, or what errors may occur. No side effects or rate limits are indicated.

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 concise sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose. There is no unnecessary verbiage 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It states the return unit, but does not specify the return format (e.g., number, object) or potential errors. Somewhat adequate but could be improved.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name 'workspace_id'. No format, example, or constraints are given. The parameter is required but its usage is not clarified.

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 gets workspace storage usage and specifies the unit (bytes). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on workspace usage rather than other workspace-related details like settings or folder. However, it does not elaborate on what exactly constitutes 'storage usage', leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like appflowy_get_workspace_settings or appflowy_get_workspace_folder. There is no indication of prerequisites, such as needing the workspace ID to be valid or any access requirements.

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