get_workflow_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function, omitting read-only status, authentication requirements, rate limits, or response structure. The docs link is not summarized, leaving the agent with minimal insight.

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 sentence plus a documentation link, with no redundant words. It is concise and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fails to convey the response format or any important caveats. For a 3-parameter tool, this is under-specified and would require the agent to follow the docs link or infer structure from other tools.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond rephrasing the run_id parameter as 'by ID', so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 the action (Get) and the resource (a workflow run), and specifies the unique identifier ('by ID'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_workflow or list_workflow_runs, though the 'by ID' qualifier reduces ambiguity.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool is used when you have a workflow run ID and need its details. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, but the phrasing 'by ID' suggests the appropriate context.

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