Get Workflow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of behavior for a missing/unknown id, no note on whether soft-deleted workflows are returned, and no indication that `include` expands the response payload.

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?

One short sentence with the resource and lookup key front-loaded; there is no padding or redundancy. It is tight to the point of under-specification rather than 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?

The tool is simple (2 params), annotations cover safety, and an output schema exists, so the return shape needn't be described. However, the description ignores the `include` parameter's ability to expand related resources, which is the one non-obvious decision an agent has to make when calling this tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both `id` (uuid or slug, with an explicit note about the argument name) and the `include` enum are fully documented in the schema. The description only restates "by id" and adds no meaning beyond the structured field.

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?

States a specific verb ("Retrieves") and resource ("workflow") plus the lookup key ("by id"), which cleanly distinguishes it from list_workflows and create/update_workflow. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 says nothing about when to reach for this tool versus list_workflows or get_workflow_form_field_condition, and offers no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer that it needs an id from a prior list call.

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