List Flow Debug Runs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and external reach are covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it defines 'open' as paused, waiting, or running, specifies newest-first ordering, and warns that a paused run holds a flow context open. It still omits details like pagination behavior or whether stale runs are included.

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 the core purpose and scope. The second sentence adds an actionable follow-up without waste. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple list tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers what is listed, ordering, and the consequence of paused runs. It does not describe the returned fields or pagination limits, but the schema's limit parameter partially compensates.

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 the schema already explains limit, instance, and created_by. The description does not add syntax, format, or default details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('debug runs still open on the instance'), and narrows the set with parenthetical states ('paused, waiting or running') plus ordering ('newest first'). It does not explicitly contrast with nearby siblings such as get_flow_context_status or list_transactions, so it falls short of the top score.

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 gives a clear scenario: find a paused run here and end it with debug_flow_cancel. That names one alternative action, but it does not give explicit when-not-to-use guidance or suggest other tools for inspecting run details.

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