Clone Flow

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=false, so the description carries real weight and delivers it: the copy is created stopped and, by default, with no accounts assigned. It doesn't mention any permission requirements or rate limits, but the key state semantics are disclosed.

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?

Three short sentences: what it does, what state the result is in, and when to prefer it. No redundancy and the core action leads.

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?

No output schema exists, so the missing piece is what the call returns (presumably the new flow's ID) — an agent needing the copy's identifier isn't told. Everything else about behavior and defaults is covered.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by explaining the consequence of connect_accounts ('components have no accounts assigned unless connect_accounts is set'), which is more than the schema's terse 'Carry the original's connected accounts over'.

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 specific verb and resource ('Copy a flow') and immediately scopes it with 'including its components and wiring', which distinguishes it from create_flow and update_flow in the sibling list.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use rule: 'Cloning then editing the copy is the safe way to change a flow that is in use.' This implies the alternative (editing a live flow in place) without naming a sibling tool, so it stops just short of a 5.

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