Get flow detail

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It adds one behavioral detail ('in executable format') but does not disclose error behavior, permission needs, or side effects. As a read operation, safety is implied but not 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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the main action and adds a valuable detail about node format. No redundant words.

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 it is a simple read operation with one well-schemaed parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but not rich. It notes executable nodes but lacks details on return structure or errors, which could be important for an agent.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description of flow_id as a UUID. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema fully compensates, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it fetches a single flow and includes nodes in executable format, distinguishing it from list_flows which lists multiple flows. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other get_* siblings like get_conversation, though the resource type is clear.

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 on when to use this vs alternatives. The description implies it is for fetching one flow by ID, but there is no mention of when not to use it or when to prefer sibling tools like list_flows.

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