Lists all available user flows with their target metrics, optionally filtered by locale (English or Spanish), so you can pick the right checklist for a design review.
List all available user flows with their target metrics.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | No | en |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe, non-mutating read, so the bar is lower. The description adds that results include target metrics, which is useful return context, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether "all" is truly exhaustive.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the returned data are stated immediately. It is arguably too terse given the gaps, but no sentence is wasted.
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 zero-required-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the definition covers the basics but omits sibling differentiation and the meaning of the locale parameter. An agent could call it, but with avoidable guesswork.
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%, so the description must compensate for the single locale parameter and does not. The enum and default in the schema show the allowed values, but nothing explains what locale actually changes about the returned flows.
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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List all available user flows") and adds the payload detail "with their target metrics," which tells an agent what comes back. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_flow, though "list all" versus "get" implies the enumeration/single-record split.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus get_flow or the principle/smell listing tools. Usage is only implied by the word "available," leaving the agent to infer that this is the catalog-enumeration call.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.