workflow_complete

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavior. It discloses that the tool completes a session, generates a report, and allows optional changes. However, it does not explicitly state whether the action is idempotent or what happens if called prematurely.

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?

The description is concise (about 6 lines) with clear sections: purpose, condition, options, return. Every sentence serves a purpose and is front-loaded with the most important information.

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, the description mentions return content ('final summary and report'). It covers necessary parameters, usage condition, and behavior. For a completion tool, it is complete and leaves no critical gaps.

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 100%, and the description adds value by explaining the options (generate_report, apply_changes, report_format) with defaults and the return type, exceeding what the schema alone 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 'Complete a Workflow Engine v2 session and generate the final report,' using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like workflow_start, workflow_cancel, etc., which handle other phases of the workflow.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this when all files have been processed (next_action.type === "complete_workflow")', providing a clear condition for use. No alternatives mentioned, but the context is sufficient given the sibling set.

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