List Flow OpenAPI endpoints

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full transparency burden. However, it merely restates the tool's function without disclosing additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, read-only nature, or result characteristics. The name and title already imply a list operation, so no extra value is added.

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, concise Korean sentence that directly states the purpose with no wasted words or unnecessary detail. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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?

The tool has no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage. The description only covers the basic action, leaving all parameter semantics and any behavioral nuances unaddressed. For a simple listing tool this is minimal but still incomplete, especially without param explanations.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any of the four parameters (group, method, search, version). The burden is on the description to compensate, but it provides no parameter information whatsoever.

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 retrieves a list of endpoints from the Flow OpenAPI document. The verb '조회합니다' (retrieve/list) and resource 'endpoint 목록' (endpoint list) are specific, and the plural '목록' distinguishes it from sibling get_flow_endpoint which likely retrieves a single endpoint.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what the tool does, without any context for selection, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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