list_workflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only restates the name and fails to mention pagination, return format, sorting, scope, or any side effects. This is effectively a tautology with zero added behavioral context.

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 extremely short (two words) but not appropriately sized because it is under-specified, not concise. A single word-for-word restatement of the name does not communicate any useful information, so it fails to earn 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns and any pagination or filtering context. It provides none of this, making it incomplete for even a simple list operation.

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% for the two parameters (page, per_page) with descriptions like 'Page number' and 'Results per page (max 100)'. The tool description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List workflows' is a verbatim restatement of the tool name 'list_workflows', providing no additional specificity about scope, filtering, or output. It does not differentiate from siblings like 'list_workflow_steps' or '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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_workflow' for a single workflow or 'list_workflow_steps' for steps. There is no mention of pagination behavior or typical use cases.

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