comfyui_get_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It accurately indicates a read operation and reveals a behavioral nuance (the include_graph flag affects output compactness), but does not mention permissions, error behavior, or any side effects. For a read tool this is decent but incomplete.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and the second sentence adds actionable parameter guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 only 2 simple parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the essentials. It could potentially clarify what 'managed workflow' means or note the default behavior of include_graph (already in schema), but overall it is complete enough for a straightforward getter tool.

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 add meaning. It explains include_graph ('false for a compact summary'), which is helpful. The 'name' parameter is not explicitly described, but 'Read a managed workflow' implies the name identifies which workflow. The description compensates reasonably for the schema's lack of 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 uses a specific verb 'Read' with a clear resource 'managed workflow', distinguishing it from siblings like list_workflows (which lists all) or create/update tools. This immediately conveys the tool's core function of retrieving a single workflow.

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?

Provides a concrete usage hint ('Set include_graph=false for a compact summary') which guides parameter choice. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use list_workflows instead) or mention exclusions, though the purpose is largely self-evident given the tool name.

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