teamstorm_get_workflow

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

The description complements the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying that the tool returns the 'complete' workflow map and that null indicates a disabled workflow. This adds behavioral interpretation beyond the annotation, particularly the null-handling semantics, without contradicting the read-only hint.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action and resource, followed by a valuable clarification about null. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 parameterless read-only tool with an output schema already provided, the description is complete. It explains the key behavioral nuance (null means disabled) and leaves the return structure to the schema. Nothing else an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter details. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description fully satisfies the requirement.

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 a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('complete configured workflow map'), and the 'null means disabled' clause adds meaningful semantic detail. This uniquely identifies the tool from sibling tools like teamstorm_get_task or teamstorm_get_links, which concern different resources.

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 implies that this tool is for reading the configured workflow map, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or exclude other contexts. No sibling is mentioned, so usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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