get_workflow_by_name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It doesn't state whether the lookup is case-sensitive, what happens on no match, or whether multiple workflows can share a name. 'Exact name' hints at strict matching but leaves behavior largely unspecified.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short for a one-parameter lookup, though it could use one clause of usage context.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, this simple retrieval tool leaves key facts open: exact-match semantics, error/empty behavior, and how it differs from get_workflow. More is needed for reliable selection.

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 the single undocumented parameter. 'Exact name' adds a useful matching hint, but it does not document format, case sensitivity, or constraints beyond what a string type implies.

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 (Finds) and resource (workflow) with a discriminating detail (by exact name). It reasonably distinguishes itself from the sibling get_workflow, which presumably fetches by id, though the description doesn't explicitly name that sibling.

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 on when to use this versus get_workflow, list_workflows, or get_policy. The 'exact name' hint implies a lookup condition but no when-not-to-use or alternative is named.

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