Create Advanced Flow

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness. The description adds that it returns 'new flow id and broken status' with an explanation of broken status, which is helpful. However, it does not elaborate on idempotency implications or failure modes. Overall adequate but not rich.

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, no extraneous words. Efficiently conveys core behavior and card structure. Perfectly sized for the complexity.

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 covers return values (id, broken status) and explains broken status. It specifies all required inputs and the structure of the complex 'cards' object. Missing mention of optional 'folder' and 'enabled' parameters, which are minor. Overall very good.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage (all parameters described), but the description goes far beyond by specifying the internal structure of the 'cards' object: keyed by UUID, each card has properties (type with allowed values, id, args, coordinates, outputSuccess/outputError arrays). This compensates for the schema's 'additionalProperties': {} which lacks detail. Adds significant meaning.

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 explicitly states 'Create a new Advanced Flow' with specific verb and resource. It details the card structure (type, id, args, coordinates, links) distinguishing it from simpler 'create_flow' sibling. Purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'create_flow'. The description focuses on input structure but does not explain scenarios where advanced flow creation is appropriate or when a simpler flow might suffice. Sibling differentiation is implied by the 'advanced' title and card complexity, not stated.

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