Triage Taskflows

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe, read-only operation, and the description's 'List' wording is consistent with that. The description adds that the tool returns taskflows and their steps, but does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as output format or potential size of results.

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 with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and clearly states the object of the listing.

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?

For a simple parameterless listing tool, the description is sufficient to understand what the tool does. It could optionally mention whether the output is a list of taskflow names with nested step details, but this is a minor omission given the straightforward nature of the 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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty schema, so the baseline is high. The description provides enough context that no parameters are needed; with no inputs to document, there is little room for parameter-level explanation.

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 clear verb ('List') and identifies the specific resource ('available triage taskflows and their steps'), which unambiguously states the tool's purpose. It is also distinct enough from sibling triage tools such as triage_findings and triage_canary_preview.

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 description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like triage_findings or validate_findings. While the purpose is clear, there is no guidance on when to choose this taskflow-listing tool over other triage-related tools.

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