gflow_character_list

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and it delivers meaningful disclosures: read-only, spends no credits, drives a browser session, and is slower than alternatives. This adds real behavioral context beyond the bare purpose, with no contradictions.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place: purpose, safety/cost, output-to-usage mapping, and performance caveat. The core purpose is front-loaded and there is zero filler.

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?

An output schema covers the return shape, and the description covers safety, cost, performance, and how to use the results. The only real gaps are profile parameter semantics and auth prerequisites, which are minor for a simple list tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It implicitly clarifies the project parameter ('in a project'), but the profile parameter and its default are left entirely to the schema. Partial compensation only.

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 names a specific verb (List), resource (saved Flow CHARACTER entities), scope (in a project), and what it returns (entity ids). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by tying its output to generate tools and explicitly comparing itself to 'the catalog 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Call this to discover what you can attach') and explains how to consume the result (id → reference_entities, display_name → @Name mention). The browser-session slowdown hints that catalog tools are preferable when speed matters, though it stops short of naming the exact alternative siblings.

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