workflow_current

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It indicates the tool reads data (retrieves step and prompt) but does not cover edge cases like invalid IDs, inactive instances, or potential side effects. The mention of 'most recently active' is helpful but not comprehensive.

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 concise at two sentences, with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides parameter guidance, both front-loaded and efficient.

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 an output schema and does not detail the return structure (e.g., format of the step, whether the prompt is a string or object). Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional param, no output schema), the description is incomplete, leaving the agent uncertain about the response format.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for 'instance_id' ('Instance ID or alias'). The tool description adds value by explaining that the parameter is optional and defaults to the most recently active instance, which is not clear from the schema alone.

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 'current workflow step and rendered prompt', specifying the action and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like workflow_advance (which moves forward) and workflow_start (which initiates a 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?

The description explains that the instance ID is optional and defaults to the most recently active instance, providing clear guidance on invocation. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a specific step is needed or when the instance is inactive.

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