get_flows_flow_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get Flow Details,' which merely confirms a read operation without revealing response format, authentication requirements, or potential failure modes. No additional behavioral context is offered.

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 extremely brief, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. 'Get Flow Details' adds little value beyond the tool name and does not earn the small space it occupies with meaningful content.

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 moderate complexity (two parameters, no output schema, no annotations), a complete description should explain what 'details' are included and any constraints. This description provides none, making it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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%, and the description does not mention either parameter. Although the parameter names 'flowId' and 'wabaAccountId' are self-explanatory, the description fails to clarify their purpose or how they relate, leaving the agent to infer semantics from the schema alone.

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 'Get Flow Details' clearly identifies the action (get) and the resource (flow details). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_flows (listing) and delete_flows_flow_id (deleting). However, it lacks specificity about which details are returned, so it does not fully stand out from get_flows_flow_id_preview.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_flows or get_flows_flow_id_preview. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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