list_workflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions required scope and API, but fails to describe pagination behavior (despite limit/offset in schema), the effect of the 'search' parameter, or any rate limits. The description is insufficient for safe agent invocation.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It is efficient, but could be slightly more structured by grouping usage guidance.

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 tool is a simple list operation with no output schema. The description omits details about return format, pagination metadata, or any response structure. It provides the minimum viable information for a list tool, but lacks completeness given the absence of annotations.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what is in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain the default limit or how search interacts with offset). Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Dynatrace Automation (Workflows) workflows'), and mentions the API ('platform Automation v1 API'). It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_workflow' and 'list_workflow_executions' through context.

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 only states the required scope ('automation:workflows:read'), but does not provide guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_workflow' for a single workflow, 'list_workflow_executions' for executions). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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