List workflows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful return-value content (ids, triggers, status) that the agent would otherwise lack, since there is no output schema. It stops short of noting anything like pagination or ordering, hence not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with labeled sections (Purpose, Not for, Returns, Use when) and no wasted prose. There is mild redundancy between the Purpose list (names, triggers, enabled state) and the Returns list (ids, triggers, status), which slightly dilutes conciseness.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately explains what is returned, and it routes the agent away from the sibling execution-listing tool. For a zero-parameter read-only list tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no per-parameter semantics to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering is available, matching the empty schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List automation workflows") and enumerates the salient fields (names, triggers, enabled state). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the nearest sibling by naming plunk_list_workflow_executions as the tool for what is currently running.

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?

Uses explicit "Not for" and "Use when" clauses, naming the alternative tool (plunk_list_workflow_executions) and the trigger conditions (need a workflow id, or user asks what automations exist and which are live). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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