cabinet_list_workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that results are 'active' heuristics and emphasizes low token output, which is useful. But it does not state permissions, pagination behavior, whether results are cached, or any other operational constraints.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence and useful category/usage details following. The phrase 'high-density, low-token' is slightly promotional, but overall every sentence contributes.

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 two-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and category values. However, it leaves the 'search' parameter undocumented and does not clarify whether category values are exact or partial matches. It is adequate but incomplete.

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 both parameters. It lists the possible categories, which adds meaning for the 'category' parameter, but says nothing about the 'search' parameter or how matching works. This is 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns ... list of active heuristics in The Cabinet.' It also scopes the output as high-density and low-token. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like cabinet_record_workflow or cabinet_refresh, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It provides a clear use case: 'Use this to pull operational tools without reading thousands of prompt tokens.' However, it gives no when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and does not name any alternative sibling tool. Usage is implied rather than fully specified.

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