Find startable XDaLa workflows

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

The description declares the operation as 'read-only' and states it does not create handoffs, setting safety expectations. However, with no annotations, more details about authentication, rate limits, or error handling would improve transparency. It covers basic behavioral traits adequately.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose with a usage hint. It is concise and direct, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) for scanning.

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?

Given 9 parameters and no output schema, the description leaves out critical details: parameter meanings, output format, and error conditions. It is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional information.

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 has 9 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain individual parameters (e.g., owner, includeOwner, limit). It only mentions address and roles in general. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool performs 'read-only discovery of deployed XRC-729 workflows' that an address can start, specifying the resource and action. It also mentions the roles (owner, executor, wildcard executor) and contrasts with creating handoffs.

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 explicitly advises when to use the tool ('whenever the user provides an address and asks which sessions/workflows they can start') and clarifies what it does not do (no session-start handoffs). It provides clear context but doesn't mention explicit alternatives or when not to use.

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