Current Unfour workspace

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

The annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description does not contradict those. It adds modest context by noting 'active local workspace' and the command-bus mechanism, but it does not disclose extra behavioral details such as fallbacks, errors, or scope limitations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler, repetition, or unnecessary qualifiers. 'Returns the active local workspace' is the core message, and the rest is minimal.

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?

This is a simple no-parameter query tool with strong annotations and an output schema present. The description is sufficient for the agent to understand the tool's basic purpose and safely invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The baseline of 4 applies because there is nothing additional the description needs to clarify about arguments.

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 returns the active local workspace, using a specific verb and resource. It is not tautological, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling unfour.workspace.list, relying mostly on the name and 'active local' wording to differentiate.

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 implies it should be used when the active/current local workspace is needed. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives like unfour.workspace.list.

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