Get A Workflow Template Version

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds that it is a GET request returning a JSON object, but no extra behavioral context (e.g., response structure, rate limits) is provided beyond the 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 a single paragraph of moderate length, front-loading the purpose. It includes API metadata (version, endpoint) which may be unnecessary for an AI agent, making it slightly less concise than ideal.

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?

For a simple read-by-id operation with no output schema, the description is adequate but vague about the returned JSON structure. It does not address potential error states or pagination details beyond schema hints, leaving some completeness gaps.

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?

All 4 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description only reiterates required parameters (company_id, id) without adding semantic insights beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 it returns details of a specific workflow template version, using verbs like 'Returns' and 'fetch'. It specifies the resource and identifier requirements, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_workflow_templates or get_a_workflow_instance.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Workflows by its identifier', which provides usage intent. However, it offers no guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, such as for listing or instances.

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