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 discloses that the tool returns flow summaries, not full sequences, and specifies the nature of the data ('real product'). It implies a read-only operation without stating it explicitly, but the behavior is reasonably transparent.

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 concise, two sentences long, with a clear opening verb, concrete examples, and a useful pointer to another tool. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage.

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 core functionality and return shape are well covered, but the optional filter parameters are entirely unexplained, and there is no mention of sorting, pagination, or any limitations. Given no output schema or annotations, the description could be more complete.

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 0% for the two parameters (query and industry), and the description never mentions them. The agent has no guidance on how to use these optional filters or what values to provide, which is a significant gap.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'user flows' with concrete examples (signup→dashboard, browse→checkout). It distinguishes from the sibling get_user_flow by noting that summaries are returned here, while full ordered screens require a separate call.

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 says when to use: 'Use to understand how a whole journey is structured before building it.' It also directs to get_user_flow(slug) as the alternative for full detail, providing clear usage context.

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