advance_workflow_run

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses smart failure handling, return details, and the condition for failure (unless continueOnFailure enabled). Missing side effects and idempotency, but generally good.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and trigger, followed by behavioral details. Efficient and no filler, though the list of return fields could be trimmed.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers core behavior and return info. Lacks error handling and idempotency details, but sufficient for this complexity.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (runId). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's description, meeting baseline.

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 advances a workflow run after tasks are completed/failed, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_next_tasks by emphasizing the advancement action and returning a comprehensive status.

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?

Implies usage after tasks complete/fail, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No comparison to sibling tools like get_next_tasks or get_next_workflow_tasks.

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