aap_get_workflow_template

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by stating the return format ('JSON with workflow details and node count') and emphasizes the node structure, which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions found.

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 concise and well-structured: one main sentence followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides necessary information, and there is no filler.

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?

This is a simple read operation with one parameter and an output schema. The description covers the key details: it returns full details including node structure, and the schema already documents the return type. No significant gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% because the description's parameter line ('workflow_id (int): Workflow template ID') exactly repeats the schema property description. It adds no new meaning, and with only one parameter the description could have added context (e.g., where to find the ID, or that it must be an existing template).

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 'Get full details of an AAP workflow template including node structure,' which specifies the verb (get), the resource (workflow template), and a distinguishing detail (node structure). This differentiates it from list operations like aap_list_workflow_templates.

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 provides clear context: it is for retrieving full details of a single workflow template. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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