List Tools Enabled For Workflows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe read behavior. The description adds value by specifying the return format ('paginated JSON array of Workflows'), pagination metadata, the required company_id parameter, and the exact API endpoint. This provides useful behavioral context beyond 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 and well-structured. It front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, follows with usage guidance, and then details pagination, required parameters, and API endpoint. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: it explains the return type, pagination controls, required parameter, and endpoint. However, it does not clarify what a 'workflowable tool' is or provide examples, which would enhance completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema: it restates the required parameter and pagination parameters but does not elaborate further. Thus, no extra value for parameters.

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 the verb 'Returns a list', the resource 'workflowable tools for a given company', and the purpose 'enumerate Workflows' with specific use cases like paginated overview and finding IDs. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being specific to tools enabled for workflows.

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 tells when to use the tool: 'when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It provides clear context for use, but does not mention alternatives or when not to use, which would make it a 5.

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