ghl_workflow_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds endpoint details, version header, and OAuth scopes, which are useful for understanding API requirements, but does not disclose return format or pagination.

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 very short and includes relevant technical details (endpoint, version, scopes) without extraneous information. However, it could be slightly improved by clarifying the purpose.

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 that there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of workflows). It does not provide this information, and the lone parameter is not described, making the tool incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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 one required parameter (locationId) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the meaning or purpose of locationId, leaving the agent to infer its role from the name only.

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 title says 'Get Workflow' but the tool name is 'ghl_workflow_list' and the endpoint is GET /workflows/ (plural), suggesting it lists workflows. The description does not clearly state that it retrieves a list of workflows, causing ambiguity about the exact operation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools include many others, but there is no indication of other workflow-related tools or criteria for selection.

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