zadig_workflow_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals the dry_run default and the requirement for confirm=true, which are important safety-relevant behaviors. However, it does not explain what dry_run actually does, whether confirm is required for persistence, or any permission or side-effect details.

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 with no filler. The most important behavioral caveat (dry_run/confirm) is front-loaded, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing essential parameter and usage detail.

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?

This is a complex create tool with a nested workflow object and six parameters, yet the description gives almost no guidance on how to construct a valid workflow, when confirmation is needed, or what project context is required. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the input side is still severely under-specified.

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 compensate for explaining the six parameters. It adds no meaning for workflow, project_key, workflow_name, or allow_redacted, and merely restates defaults for dry_run and confirm that are already visible in the schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Create a custom workflow.' It is clear enough to distinguish a create operation from siblings like workflow_update or workflow_delete, though it does not explicitly contrast with workflow_apply or workflow_diff.

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 when-to-use or alternative-selection guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to choose create over apply or update, nor does it state prerequisites such as project_key or workflow structure requirements.

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