yaaif_list_ambient_workflows

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, what filtering or criteria it applies, whether there are pagination limits, or what 'platform local tool' means. The only behavioral hint is the word 'list,' which implies a read operation.

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 short, with no filler. However, 'via platform local tool' is vague and doesn't earn its place; the extreme brevity comes at the expense of needed context.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, three undocumented parameters, and a confusing sibling (yaaif_ambient_workflow_list), this description leaves too much unknown. An agent would not know which parameters are needed, what the response looks like, or whether this differs from the sibling.

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%, and the description adds no meaning for agent_id, arguments, or session_id. With three parameters and one nested object, the agent cannot infer parameter purposes, formats, or optionality from either source.

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?

States a clear action ('List ambient workflows') and a resource. However, the qualifier 'via platform local tool' is vague and does not meaningfully distinguish it from the sibling yaaif_ambient_workflow_list, which appears to do the same thing.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus yaaif_ambient_workflow_list or yaaif_platform_list. It does not state conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent to guess which listing tool is appropriate.

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