list_workflow_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, permissions required, or response format. It doesn't mention that it's a read-only operation or any constraints, leaving significant gaps for a tool with parameters.

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, direct sentence with zero waste, front-loading the core action. It's appropriately sized for such a simple statement, though this conciseness comes at the cost of detail.

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 annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover parameter meanings, behavioral aspects, or usage context, making it inadequate for a tool with parameters and siblings in a complex server environment.

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%, and the description provides no information about parameters beyond what the schema includes. It doesn't explain the meaning of 'workflow_id', 'limit', or 'offset', or how they affect the listing, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List workflow versions from ServiceNow' clearly states the action (list) and resource (workflow versions), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'list_workflows' or 'get_workflow_details'. It doesn't specify whether this lists all versions or filtered ones, making it minimally adequate but with gaps.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_workflows' or 'get_workflow_details'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, filtering, or typical use cases, offering no help in tool selection.

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