Retrieve the workspace's MCP connection and security configuration with sensitive data masked for safe analysis.
获取脱敏后的 MCP 连接与安全配置
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_workspace_info"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the output is 'desensitized', which is a behavioral trait beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose the format or scope of the returned configuration.
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?
A single, clear sentence. No wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and resource.
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 no output schema, the description could be more helpful by listing typical fields returned. However, the tool is simple and annotations cover safety. The description is minimally adequate but lacks detail on what the configuration contains.
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?
There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). No additional semantic value is required.
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 states a specific action and resource: 'Get desensitized MCP connection and security configuration'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools, which focus on notebooks, documents, blocks, databases, files, etc.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is a simple getter, the lack of context for when to retrieve workspace info (e.g., initial setup or troubleshooting) means the agent must infer usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.