Get workflow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining the projection version selection: active_version for pinned execution, falling back to current_version for drafts. This nuance is not present in annotations and helps the agent understand which version is returned.

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 two sentences with an effective front-loaded structure: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second explains a key behavioral detail. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

This is a simple read-only getter with one parameter and no output schema. The description fully addresses the tool's purpose and the only non-obvious behavior (projection version). No significant gaps remain for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% with a clear description for workflow_id ('The workflow's UUID (from list_workflows or create_workflow)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, 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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Get one workflow's metadata and step projection'. This distinguishes from sibling tools such as list_workflows (which lists all workflows) and get_workflow_execution (which retrieves execution details) by focusing on a single workflow's metadata and step projection.

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 implies usage by stating what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_workflow_execution or list_workflows, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The schema mention of list_workflows/create_workflow for obtaining the ID provides some context, but no direct when-to-use guidance.

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