List flows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does not disclose pagination behavior despite page/per_page parameters, nor whether it returns only metadata or internal flow details, or if any authentication requirements exist.

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 concise clause, but it lacks elaboration on pagination; conciseness is not an issue. However, it is adequately brief and front-loaded, earning a 4.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not mention pagination behavior, response structure, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for a potentially paginated list operation.

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 coverage is only 33% (only bot_id described). The description repeats bot_id but does not explain page/per_page semantics, which are nondescriptive in schema, thus failing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 lists flows belonging to a bot identified by UUID. It is specific enough to distinguish from siblings (e.g., list_bots, get_flow) but does not explicitly contrast with them.

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. While the description implies it is for fetching all flows of a bot, it does not mention alternatives like get_flow for single flow details or how pagination works.

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