list_closed_workflow_executions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully explains that closed means completed, failed, terminated, etc., but it does not mention ordering, pagination results, region defaulting, or any rate/safety considerations. A borderline adequate 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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and the parenthetical status list is compact and informative. There is no wasted wording.

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 combination of schema and description is sufficient for a basic invocation: required times are clear, defaults are in the schema, and the resource type is named. However, there is no output schema and the description does not describe return shape, paging behavior, or when to prefer this over list_workflow_executions, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 input schema covers all four parameters with descriptions, formats, defaults, and enums (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. It adds no param-specific detail beyond the time range, matching the baseline.

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'), a specific resource ('workflow executions'), and a clear qualifier ('closed – completed, failed, terminated, etc'), which differentiates it from sibling list_workflow_executions. The time-range constraint is also stated clearly.

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 makes the intended context clear: use when you need executions that have already closed within a specified time range. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the state filter and time range are enough context to guide selection.

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