workspace_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool lists repositories the bridge can open and reports the active one, implying a read-only operation. It adds useful context about the 'can open' constraint, which clarifies the scope beyond the generic 'workspace_list' name. It does not mention side effects, but none are expected for a list operation.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides usage guidance. Every word serves a purpose and the tool name is not redundantly repeated.

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?

The tool is simple (zero params, no output schema) and the description adequately explains what it returns: a list of openable repositories and the currently active one. It also provides sequencing context ('call this first'). While it doesn't define output format, for a simple list operation this is sufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter behavior because there are none. It correctly focuses on what the tool returns and when to use it.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'repositories the bridge can open' and adds the active one, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like workspace_open or workspace_close. It also references the 'bridge' context, making the scope unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use: 'Call this first when you do not know what is available.' This gives a clear invocation context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. The 'first' directive implies a sequencing guideline relative to other workspace operations.

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