patch_flows_flow_id_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects, permissions, or irreversibility. The phrase 'Update' implies mutation, but there is no mention of what changes are made, whether they are reversible, or required scopes. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 three-word phrase with minimal structure. While it contains no filler, it is severely under-specified and fails to serve as a useful descriptive sentence. This is not conciseness but under-specification.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is wholly inadequate. It does not explain the purpose of the parameters, the return value, potential errors, or the operational context. The tool name hints at flow assets but the description adds no contextual depth.

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 does not explain the parameters. The two parameters (flowId, wabaAccountId) are only indicated by name and type, with no semantic meaning added. 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 'Update Flow Structure' provides a verb and a resource, indicating it modifies flow structure. However, 'Flow Structure' is vague and does not specify what 'assets' means in the tool name, nor does it distinguish from sibling tools like patch_flows_flow_id_metadata. It is clear but lacks specificity.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as patch_flows_flow_id_metadata or create_flows, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context. Zero guidance is given.

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