get-workflow-run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It clearly indicates a read-only retrieval and the latest-vs-specific scope, but it does not explicitly state that it does not mutate or cancel anything, nor describe response or error behavior. The description is not misleading, but it is minimal.

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 filler. The essential distinction between latest and specific is front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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 status-read tool, the description combined with the complete schema is largely sufficient. The tool has no output schema, so the agent only learns that the result is a 'status', but the core selection logic and optional filters are adequately covered by the schema and description.

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 100%, so all five parameters are already documented in the input schema. The phrase 'latest or a specific workflow run' adds useful context for run_id's optionality, but the description does not meaningfully expand on status or workflow_id beyond what the schema already says.

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 concrete verb and resource: it gets a GitHub Actions workflow run's status, with the option of latest or a specific run. This separates it from mutation siblings like cancel-workflow-run and trigger-workflow, although it does not explicitly contrast with get-workflow.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get-workflow or list-workflows. The intended use is inferable, but there are no exclusions or explicit routing hints to sibling tools.

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