ghl_get_workflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' clearly conveys a read-only, non-destructive operation. It adds the location scope and the fact that it returns all workflows. However, it doesn't disclose return format, pagination, or error behavior, which is a minor gap for a simple list tool.

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 sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and scope; the second provides the practical use case. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and is a straightforward list operation, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, the scope, and why you'd use it. No additional behavior needs explanation.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools, and the description doesn't introduce any ambiguity.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'workflows/automations' and scopes it to 'the GHL location'. It also explicitly states the purpose: 'Use this to discover workflow IDs before enrolling contacts.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add/remove contact to workflow.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'before enrolling contacts' to discover workflow IDs. It implies this is a prerequisite step for enrollment operations, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools 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.