list_workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It reveals the sorting order ('newest first') and location ('on spark'), but does not explicitly confirm it is a safe read-only operation, nor does it mention pagination, limits, or return format. The verb 'List' implies read-only, but a more explicit statement would improve transparency.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It contains no filler and every word contributes to meaning.

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 extreme simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what is listed, where, and in what order. It could be enhanced by clarifying the return structure or what 'spark' refers to, but for a listing tool this is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. Per the guidelines, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameter information is needed, and the description does not need to explain non-existent parameters.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'ComfyUI workflow JSON files on spark', with the scope 'newest first'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_outputs and list_models, which target different resources.

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 for enumerating workflow files, but does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as read_workflow or write_workflow. No exclusions or context for when to choose this tool over others is provided, so it remains implicit.

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