circleci_get_workflow

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Get details' but does not indicate whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication is required (though api_key is a parameter), rate limits, or any side effects. The description is too minimal for full transparency.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. However, given its brevity, it sacrifices detail for 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?

The description lacks important context such as what 'details' are returned, the structure of the output, and how this tool fits into the broader workflow. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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%, with both api_key and workflow_id having clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional information about the parameters beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves details for a single CircleCI workflow by its ID. This distinguishes it from siblings like circleci_list_workflows (which lists workflows) and circleci_get_pipeline (which gets pipeline details), making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of scenarios where it should not be used. It simply states what it does, leaving the agent without context for appropriate usage.

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