list_flows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating no side effects and potentially many results. The description adds the optional filter capability but does not detail pagination behavior or response structure. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Exceptionally concise at 11 words, front-loaded with the key action and resource. No wasted words. Could include a brief usage note, but it's efficient enough.

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 list tool with annotations and schema, the description is passably complete. However, with no output schema, it would benefit from mentioning what fields are returned (e.g., flow name, status) to manage agent expectations. Currently minimal but not deficient.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description only restates that filters are optional, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly specifies the verb 'List' and the resource 'Flow Designer flows'. Mentions optional filters, which aids in distinguishing from other list tools like list_subflows or list_process_automations. However, it could be more explicit about what constitutes a Flow Designer flow.

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 guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention that for a specific flow's details, 'get_flow' should be used, or how it compares to other list tools. A sentence with usage context would improve this.

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