get_workflow

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no note on error behavior for an unknown id, permissions required to read a workflow, or what a workflow object contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though at this length the brevity borders on under-specification rather than polished 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 trivial one-parameter read with readOnlyHint covering safety and no output schema, the description is the minimum viable. It omits any mention of what is returned or how an unknown workflowId behaves, but nothing critical blocks correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description carries some burden, but 'by id' plus the self-documenting property name workflowId (string) conveys the required identifier. It adds no format, sourcing, or example guidance beyond that single hint.

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+resource ('Get one workflow') plus the lookup key ('by id'), and the singular 'one workflow' implicitly separates it from the plural get_workflows sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling, so it doesn't earn 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?

No statement of when to use this versus get_workflows, get_queue_workflows, or get_workflow-related updaters. The 'by id' phrasing weakly implies single-item lookup, but no alternative or precondition is ever named.

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