df_flow_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Listar' signals a read-only operation and the description reveals the output contract (name, trigger, step count). It does not discuss project scope, sorting, or response format, but for a parameterless list tool this is sufficient.

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?

One short sentence with every element earning its place: action, scope, and output fields. No filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description provides everything needed: what is listed and what fields are returned. No prerequisite information is required.

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 and 100% schema coverage, so the description does not need to explain parameters. Per the baseline for zero-parameter tools, this is correct.

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 uses a specific verb ('Listar'), names the resource ('flows configurados'), and specifies the returned fields ('nombre, disparador y numero de pasos'). This makes it easy to distinguish from the related df_flow_get, which would retrieve a single flow.

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 phrase 'todos los flows configurados' gives clear context: use this when you need the full set of configured flows and their summary metadata. It does not explicitly mention alternatives such as df_flow_get for a single flow, so it stops short of a 5.

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