List workflows

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

annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so 'Read-only.' adds no new information. The description does disclose the returned shape (name, version, description), which helps in the absence of an output schema, but says nothing about ordering, empty results, or whether the list is scoped or unbounded.

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?

Very short and front-loaded: purpose, return fields, then the trigger condition. The 'Read-only.' fragment largely restates the annotation and is the one piece that does not fully earn its place.

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?

Zero-parameter read tool with no output schema; the description covers what is returned and when to reach for it. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% and there is nothing for the description to clarify parametrically.

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 names the resource (saved workflows) and the fields surfaced (name, version, description), so an agent knows this is an enumeration of stored workflows. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling workflow_get, leaving the singular-vs-list split to be inferred from the names.

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?

It gives an explicit entry condition — 'Start here when the user refers to a previous browser task' — with two concrete examples ('like last time', 'the September export'). No when-not condition or named alternative (e.g. workflow_get for a single known workflow) is provided.

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