list_flows_by_number

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's behavioral disclosure is minimal. It adds that omitting from_id uses a default, but does not elaborate on error cases or other behavioral traits. Given the annotation coverage, the description provides marginal added transparency.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys all essential information without redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding, achieving high conciseness.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description is complete. It covers the tool's purpose and key parameter behavior, leaving no major gaps for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that from_id specifies a number and can be omitted to use a default. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare type definition. However, it could specify the default's origin or format for completeness.

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 tool lists WhatsApp Flows for a specific number. The verb 'Lista' (list) and resource 'WhatsApp Flows' are specific, and the parameter from_id is mentioned. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_flows', which likely lists all flows, leaving some ambiguity.

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 implies usage context by specifying the parameter and noting that omitting it uses a default. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_flows', nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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