Set agent instructions

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 mutation semantics for each mode, including that 'replace' overwrites the whole list and 'remove' targets by id or title, but says nothing about permissions, reversibility of removal, or behavior of the undocumented 'enabled' flag.

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?

A single dense sentence that puts the resource and purpose first and then the mode semantics. Every clause earns its place, though the parenthetical could be slightly cleaner.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 25% schema coverage, the description covers the mode behavior reasonably but leaves the 'enabled' toggle and array item semantics unexplained, so an agent cannot fully model the call.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate. It usefully explains the mode enum values and how removal targets items (id or title), but the 'enabled' parameter and the instruction object's active/id/text fields remain undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

Names the resource (project 'Agent instructions') and describes the effect (guidelines Flow's agent follows for style, format, tone). A specific verb+object pair, though it never explicitly contrasts with siblings like flow_set_generation_defaults or flow_agent_respond.

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?

Usage is implied through the mode semantics ('add' appends, 'replace' sets the list, 'remove' deletes), so an agent can infer when each mode applies. There is no explicit when-to-use-this-instead-of-alternatives guidance or prerequisite statement.

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