webex_list_spaces

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. 'List' weakly implies a read-only operation, but nothing is said about pagination behavior (the max/to/from parameters suggest paged results), ordering defaults, whether results are limited to spaces the caller belongs to, or rate limits. For a 7-parameter listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a substantial gap.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, so nothing is wasted. But the brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness: it omits information the agent needs rather than compressing it.

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?

With 7 optional parameters, an enum, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should establish filtering, pagination, and return-shape expectations. Instead it provides one sentence, leaving the agent to reverse-engineer usage entirely from cryptic schema hints like 'Public before' and 'Public since'.

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 high (86%), so the schema already documents most parameters and the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — no explanation of how from/to interact, how sortBy values are chosen, or how orgPublicSpaces conflicts with type beyond what the parameter text already says.

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 names a concrete verb and resource (list + spaces) and adds the scope qualifier 'accessible', so the basic operation is identifiable. However, it offers no differentiation from close siblings such as webex_search_spaces or webex_get_space, leaving the agent to infer why one would list rather than search or fetch a single space.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites or permissions, and no mention of the alternative tools (search_spaces, get_space) that overlap with this one. The agent must guess which sibling to select for a given user intent.

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