github_trigger_workflow

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

The description mentions routing and auth scoping ('Routes through /api/tools/invoke under your JWT, tenant, and company scope'), which adds some context. However, it omits critical behavioral traits such as whether the tool is destructive, idempotent, or what side effects it has. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it sacrifices substance for brevity. While concise, it is under-specified for a tool that triggers an action.

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?

The tool has an output schema but the description does not mention return values or behavior. As a trigger action, it should at least describe what happens (e.g., workflow run created). The lack of essential functional info makes it incomplete.

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?

The single parameter 'arguments' is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation', which adds little beyond the schema's title. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain expected structure, required fields, or examples.

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 repeats the tool name as 'Github connector operation trigger_workflow' without explaining what trigger_workflow does. It does not clarify the action (e.g., triggering a workflow run) or differentiate from sibling tools like github_dispatch_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, its prerequisites, or alternatives. The tool exists alongside similar tools like 'trigger_workflow' and 'github_dispatch_workflow', but no differentiation is given.

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