start_workflow_execution

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

With no annotations, the description transparently discloses key behavior: dependency-aware task initialization, automatic marking of ready tasks as in_progress, and return of runId and ready tasks. Could mention edge cases like existing runs or error handling.

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, no wasted words, clearly structured with front-loaded purpose and concise behavior description.

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 simple parameter and no output schema, the description includes all necessary context: purpose, behavior, and return value (runId and ready tasks). Complete for this 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 100% for the single parameter 'workflowId', which is already described in the schema. The description does not add new semantic information beyond what the schema provides.

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 starts execution of a workflow with dependency-aware task initialization, referencing specific verb 'Start' and resource 'workflow execution'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'execute_task' by mentioning dependency-aware initialization.

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?

The description implies usage for initiating workflow runs but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'advance_workflow_run' or 'execute_task'. No when-not guidance provided.

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