yax_control_workflow

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

Description does not add behavioral traits beyond annotations. Annotations show destructiveHint=true, but description omits consequences of stopping or resuming, such as impact on ongoing processes or required state.

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?

Very concise single sentence that front-loads the main actions (stop/resume) and clearly states the target resource.

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 no output schema and destructive annotation, description is minimally adequate but lacks details on outcomes, prerequisites, or state dependencies. Could include more for a mutation 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 coverage is 50% (workflow_id has description, action has enum but no description). Description adds value by explaining 'approve human gate' for resume, but does not elaborate on workflow_id or action values beyond that.

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 clearly states the tool stops (cancels) or resumes (approves human gate) orchestration workflow runs. It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like yax_run_secure_workflow and yax_list_runs.

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 on when to use stop vs resume, or when to use this tool over alternatives like yax_run_secure_workflow. The description only states what it does without context.

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