List all available workflows, filtering by tags or active status, and paginate results.
List all available workflows with filtering and pagination
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | Filter by tags (optional) | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of workflows to return | |
| active | No | Filter by active status (optional) | |
| offset | No | Number of workflows to skip |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that the operation is read-only, whether it requires auth, the default page size (50) or 200 cap, or the ordering of results — all relevant for a paginated list 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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity contributes to the gaps in the other dimensions.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry more of the load — return shape, default/cap values, and result ordering are all absent. For a four-parameter paginated list tool this leaves the agent underinformed.
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 100%, so the four parameters are already fully documented, setting a baseline of 3. The phrase 'filtering and pagination' generically maps to the tags/active and limit/offset params but adds no syntax, format, or default detail beyond the schema.
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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (workflows) with scope 'all available', which implicitly contrasts with the singular get_workflow sibling. However, it never names a sibling or otherwise disambiguates itself from list_executions or get_workflow explicitly.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. 'with filtering and pagination' hints at the caller's workflow but does not tell the agent when this tool is preferable to get_workflow or list_executions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.