list_flows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly states the primary behavior ('List all WhatsApp Flows') but does not disclose additional traits such as read-only safety, pagination, limits, or authentication requirements. The word 'list' implies safety, but this is not explicit.

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 sentence with no redundancy or unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded with the action ('List all WhatsApp Flows') and includes the necessary scope, making it highly efficient.

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 optional parameter and no output schema. The description clearly states what it does and is sufficient for a basic list operation. However, it could be slightly more complete by mentioning the return value format or pagination, but given the low complexity, it is adequate.

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 single parameter waba_id is fully described in the schema (100% coverage) with a clear description including the env var default. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already handles it, so a baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clearly defined resource ('WhatsApp Flows') with a scope ('for a WhatsApp Business Account'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_templates (which lists templates) and get_flow (which retrieves 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 usage is implied: use this tool to list WhatsApp Flows. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like get_flow or list_templates, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It provides clear context but lacks when-to/not-to guidance.

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