list_workflow_runs

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states 'List all workflow runs', implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention side effects, ordering, pagination, or whether it returns runs from all workflows or a specific workflow. The minimal description suffices for a simple list but lacks depth.

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 concise with a single sentence containing no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is simple. However, it lacks any mention of the output format, such as the structure of workflow run objects or any potential side effects. Among 25 siblings, this description does not fully prepare the agent to select or invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage (empty). The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable because none needed. Baseline is 3, but since schema coverage is high and no parameters, the description is sufficient.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and resource 'workflow runs', making the action clear. It distinguishes itself from 'get_workflow_run' (which retrieves a specific run) by implying all runs. However, it could be more specific about what 'all workflow runs' encompasses (e.g., across all workflows or within a project).

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_workflow_run', 'cleanup_workflow_runs', or 'list_workflows'. The description does not mention any context for usage, such as expected use cases or limitations.

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