get_build_profile_workflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fully discloses the read-only behavior, parameter requirements, return structure (standard envelope with success/error), and even includes an example. No side effects or hidden traits.

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: first sentence states purpose, then separate sections for args, returns, and examples. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the key action.

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 has one parameter and an output schema (mentioned in context), the description covers usage, parameter semantics, return format, error handling, and an example. It is fully complete for a retrieval tool.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly explains the profile_id parameter as 'The build profile ID (e.g. UUID)', adding meaning beyond the schema's type and title. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states 'Get workflows for a build profile by profile ID', a specific verb+resource. It lists the returned fields (id, name, last used time), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_build_profile_details or get_workflow_detail.

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 provides clear context (by profile ID) and an example usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives among the many sibling tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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