workiva_list_chain_runs

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of explaining behavior. It only states the action 'List runs', without disclosing any details such as whether pagination is supported, what fields are returned, or any side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 very concise and front-loaded with the main action. The 'Args' section is compact and easy to parse. It earns high marks for brevity, though the structure could be more natural for a description field.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema present, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks context about what a 'run' is and any details about the listing behavior (e.g., ordering, limits), leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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 includes 'chain_id: The chain UUID', which adds a small clarification over the schema's 'Chain Id' by specifying the format. However, it does not provide further details on how the UUID should be formatted or where to find it, so it is minimally adequate.

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 states 'List runs of a chain' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly identifies the action and the target, distinguishing it from other list tools by the 'chain runs' resource, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description neither mentions other tools nor gives context about prerequisites or selection criteria.

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