list_flows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and limits the scope to 'published sub-flows', which usefully signals what the tool does and does not expose. It does not describe pagination or output structure, but for a simple list operation this is adequate.

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 deliver the core purpose, the filter option, and the key downstream use case. The most important information is front-loaded, and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it says what is listed, how results can be filtered, what identifier to extract, and that it is read-only. An agent can correctly select and invoke this tool without further documentation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and only one optional `name` parameter. The description adds that this parameter filters results by name, which is useful, but it does not clarify whether matching is exact, partial, or case-sensitive. The added meaning is modest but not fully compensating for the schema 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 and resource: 'List published sub-flows' with an optional name filter. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by noting it provides the exact `flow_name` needed for `trigger_flow`, which is a sibling tool in the same list.

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 clear context: use this tool to retrieve a valid `flow_name` for `trigger_flow`. It does not explicitly state exclusions or when not to use it, but the intended workflow is evident from the mention of `trigger_flow`.

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