get_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states what is returned, but omits whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has side effects. Minimal transparency for a retrieval tool.

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: one sentence for purpose and a clear parameter description. No redundancy or fluff. The structure front-loads the purpose and then provides param details efficiently.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return format. It covers the purpose and parameter adequately. Missing minor details like error handling or pagination, but complete for a simple get-by-id 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?

The description adds meaning to the parameter 'workflow_id' by specifying it is a 'UUID of the workflow', going beyond the schema's type-only definition. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 full workflow details including steps and configuration, using the verb 'Get' and specifying the resource 'workflow'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_workflows' which likely return 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?

The description implies usage when full details are needed, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like 'list_workflows' or 'get_run_summary'. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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