flow_list

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

In the absence of annotations, the description thoroughly discloses behavioral traits: output is a Markdown table, conventions (star prefix for user's flows, lock marker for active sessions), default hiding of done-flows, and ordering logic. This fully compensates for missing 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 concise with two short paragraphs. The first line immediately states the purpose. The second paragraph adds necessary convention details without fluff. It could be slightly more concise but is well-structured.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description specifies the output format (Markdown table with columns). It covers defaults, filtering options, ordering, and usage intent. For a list tool, this provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the Markdown table format and the default behavior of includeDone (hidden by default). It also reinforces the meaning of the 'mine' parameter with the star prefix convention.

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 that this tool 'List flows as a Markdown table' with specific columns. It distinguishes itself from other tools like flow_get or flow_create by focusing on listing, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling listing tools.

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 explicitly states 'Use this to find flows to work on or to brief the user on the backlog.' This provides clear usage context. It also mentions the default hiding of done-flows and the includeDone parameter, but does not exclude alternatives or state when not to use it.

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