Workspace map

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the 15-minute caching mechanism and the specific data types returned, including the user ID. However, it doesn't explicitly mention read-only semantics, permissions, or error conditions, which are minor gaps.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core content. The first sentence states what is returned, while the second adds usage guidance and caching behavior. No wasted words.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the return contents and caching behavior. It could be more explicit about the return structure, but the list of included items is sufficient for an agent to know what to expect.

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 coverage is 100% for the single optional boolean parameter, and the schema description already explains its purpose and cost. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves the workspace's spaces, folders, lists (with status names), members, and user ID. This is a specific verb+resource description that distinguishes it from sibling task-focused tools, and the 'Call this first' guidance reinforces its role as an ID lookup.

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 instructs to call this first when needing an ID for any other tool, establishing a clear usage context. The caching note also implies repeat calls are efficient, giving practical guidance. It doesn't mention when not to use, but the primary use case is clearly stated.

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