Lists the account’s call-flow function endpoints—the HTTPS URLs a flow’s “Call a function” step can invoke mid-call—so you can identify available functions.
List the account's call-flow function endpoints — the HTTPS endpoints a flow's "Call a function" step may invoke mid-call (settings scope).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.71.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It conveys read semantics through 'List' and explains the domain scope, but does not mention pagination, authorization requirements, or other operational traits. It adds useful domain context but falls short of full behavioral disclosure.
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, front-loaded sentence that defines the resource and its purpose without filler. Every phrase contributes meaning.
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 the tool's low complexity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It defines the resource and scope well, though it does not describe the return format or pagination behavior, which are minor gaps for a simple list operation.
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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids irrelevant parameter detail.
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 ('call-flow function endpoints'), and adds domain context by defining them as HTTPS endpoints invoked by a 'Call a function' step. It clearly distinguishes list from create/update/delete/test siblings via the verb and resource, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.
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 what the tool returns but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it instead of siblings like get_call_flow, test_call_flow_function, or create_call_flow_function. Usage is only implied by the resource name and the '(settings scope)' note.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.