List Unfour workspaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral value by noting that results are obtained 'through the Unfour command bus' and that the active workspace is marked, which is not present in the annotations.

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, tightly worded sentence that front-loads the main action ('Lists all local workspaces') and adds only the essential detail about marking the active workspace. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity, zero parameters, strong annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It tells the agent what the tool does, the scope of results, and one meaningful output detail (active marker) without unnecessary elaboration.

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, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter behavior because there are no inputs to interpret.

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 'lists all local workspaces', which is a specific verb and resource scope. It also notes the active-workspace marker, distinguishing it from the sibling unfour.workspace.current, which focuses on a single workspace.

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 phrase 'all local workspaces' provides clear context for when to use this tool: when the agent needs a full list rather than only the current workspace. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling list makes the intended usage reasonably inferable.

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