get_flow_executions

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states the basic action without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, result format, or whether it returns all executions without filters). This is insufficient for an API that likely has implicit behaviors.

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 sentence with 8 words, which is concise but under-specifies important context. It lacks front-loading of critical details but is not verbose.

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 is too minimal. It fails to clarify the nature of 'executions,' potential result size, filtering, or ordering. A get-all tool should provide more context.

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 both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema (e.g., realm, flow_alias). Baseline 3 is appropriate as it neither harms nor significantly helps.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves all executions for a specific authentication flow, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('executions'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_auth_execution (singular) or get_auth_flow.

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 tool versus alternatives. Among siblings, there are similar get tools for auth flows, but no differentiation or context provided.

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