list_workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List workflow definitions,' implying a read-only operation, but lacks details about rate limits, pagination, data freshness, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool that handles potentially sensitive workflow definitions.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly communicates the tool's purpose with no superfluous words or repetition. It is optimally brief.

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?

While the output schema exists and reduces the need to explain return values, the description is too minimal for a tool in a complex ecosystem. It does not clarify the scope of 'workflow definitions,' whether they are system-defined or user-created, or any filtering or ordering capabilities. With many sibling list tools, more context would be helpful.

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, so the schema coverage is 100%. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter semantics. It correctly communicates that no input is required.

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 definitions', which clearly indicates the tool's action. However, it does not distinguish this from other list tools (e.g., list_aoc_runs, list_domain_actions) that also list definitions or runs, leaving some ambiguity about what 'workflows' refers to specifically.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context for when it should or should not be called.

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