List Shortcut Workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only restates the tool's name ('List all workflows') and adds no detail about side effects, read-only nature, pagination, or the unexpected dry_run parameter. This is a significant gap for a tool that has a non-obvious parameter.

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 no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and immediately states the action and target, earning a maximum score for conciseness.

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?

For a tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is too thin. It doesn't explain the dry_run parameter, what the response contains, or any prerequisites. The presence of a dry_run parameter on a list tool is unusual enough that it absolutely needs explanation.

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 has one parameter (dry_run) with no description, and the tool description doesn't mention it at all. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate but fails completely, leaving the parameter's purpose entirely unknown.

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 ('workflows') and scopes it to 'all workflows in your Shortcut workspace.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list_* tools like list_projects or list_members, which target different resources.

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 when to use the tool (when you need to retrieve all workflows) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. It doesn't mention any exclusions or competing tools, so the usage context is only implied.

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