get_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description explains the output format options (ui vs api) and their implications. It discloses that the tool returns raw JSON and recommends api format. Could mention that it's a read-only operation, but the context makes it clear.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidance. No wasted words. Well-structured and efficient.

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 covers purpose, usage context, parameter details, and alternative tools. It is complete for a read operation with two parameters.

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%, and description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: explains format parameter with usage details, and for filename suggests using list_workflows to discover available files. Adds high value.

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 clearly states 'Load a saved workflow and return its raw JSON' with specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling analyze_workflow, achieving high clarity.

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?

Explicitly says when to use get_workflow vs analyze_workflow, providing specific scenarios where this tool is needed (for enqueue_workflow, modify_workflow, save_workflow). No exclusions needed.

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