github_trigger_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the trigger requirement but does not mention required permissions, side effects (e.g., creating a new run), or whether the tool is asynchronous. For a mutating action, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose, followed by a condition and a structured parameter list. The list is necessary given the lack of schema descriptions. It is not excessively verbose, though the Arg list repeats property names that already exist in the schema.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value coverage is not needed. The description covers all parameters and the key prerequisite. It lacks details on error conditions or side effects, but for a trigger tool with a clear purpose, this is reasonably complete.

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 Arg list fully compensates by explaining every parameter with meaning and examples (e.g., workflow_id as 'deploy.yml', inputs as a JSON string). It adds substantial value beyond the bare schema property names.

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 'Trigger a workflow dispatch event (manually run a workflow)' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like listing or getting workflow runs by focusing on the action of manually triggering a run.

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?

It provides an explicit prerequisite: 'The workflow must have a workflow_dispatch trigger defined.' This gives clear context for when to use the tool. It does not name alternative tools explicitly, but the condition is enough to differentiate usage.

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