List GitHub Actions Workflows

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it lists 'registered' targets and includes 'latest status', which provides some scoping context, but does not elaborate on filtering behavior, pagination, or return format beyond status.

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, focused sentence that starts with the verb 'List' and immediately conveys the subject. No wasted words or redundant details.

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 core purpose is clear, and the description mentions the latest status as a return aspect, but it lacks details about what fields are returned (e.g., workflow name, ID) and does not explain how optional parameters affect results. Given the absence of an output schema, more description would be needed for full completeness.

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%, placing the burden on the description to explain parameters. The description does not mention the 'tags' or 'status' parameters at all. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no explicit meaning, such as clarifying that 'tags' filters by tags and 'status' filters by the up/down/unknown state.

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 verb ('List') and the resource ('registered GitHub Actions workflow targets') along with the additional detail of including their latest status. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_gitlab_pipelines and list_http_targets.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: to list registered GitHub Actions workflow targets. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear given the tool name and the 'registered' qualifier, which differentiates it from other list tools.

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