list_workflows

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it auto-fetches all pages by default, which is non-obvious and important for an agent to know, and it describes what the summaries contain.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return shape, then behavior and parameters. Efficient and no wasted phrasing, though the return-value detail is slightly redundant without an output schema.

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?

Complete enough for a read-only list tool: purpose, scope, return contents, and pagination behavior are all covered. No output schema exists, so explaining the summaries is helpful; only finer details like error or empty-result behavior are 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter with defaults and semantics. The description restates the pagination and sorting intent but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource (list workflows) and scopes it to the current GoHighLevel location. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_workflow, audit_workflow, and list_folders because it describes a collection listing with summaries.

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?

Explains the default behavior (auto-fetch all pages) and when to override it with limit/offset, and mentions sorting. It does not explicitly name a sibling as an alternative or state when-not-to-use, but the context is clear.

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