get-business-flows

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns ordered sequences and is framework-neutral, but doesn't mention rate limits, errors, authentication needs, or output structure. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 with no waste. The purpose is stated first, followed by specifics and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what is returned, for which flows, and when to call. Slightly more detail on return format would improve completeness.

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 covers the single 'flow' parameter with enum and description. The tool description adds value by listing example flows ('checkout, auth, password reset...') and noting they are 'ordered' and 'non-negotiable', moving beyond schema details.

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 'non-negotiable business flows' for a Brainerce store, returning 'ordered SDK call sequences' for specific flows. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get-code-example or get-critical-rules.

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 explicitly advises 'Call this before implementing any of these flows,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. Though it doesn't mention when not to use or alternatives, the sibling context and clarity of purpose make usage intuitive.

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