get_workflow_details

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool retrieves configuration details (read-only), but does not mention any behavioral traits like required permissions, idempotency, or error conditions. The verb 'Retrieve' implies safety, but not explicit.

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?

Single sentence, 15 words, immediately conveys purpose. No redundant or filler information.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately lists the included configuration aspects. However, it could mention potential error scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., workflow existence).

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 has one parameter (workflowId) with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not explain the parameter's format, source, or constraints, leaving the agent to infer its meaning from context.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'detailed Xcode Cloud workflow configuration', listing specific included fields (environment, start conditions, actions, enabled state). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_workflows (listing summaries) and update_* tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, but the description implies it is for retrieving detailed configuration of a specific workflow, contrasting with listing or update tools. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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