Create A Workflow Instance (Company)

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it creates a new object, returns HTTP 201, and explains the precedence rule between template_id and preset_id. This supplements the annotations without contradiction.

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 and well-structured: it starts with the core purpose, then explains optional parameters, required parameters, and endpoint details. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no output schema, and provided annotations, the description covers creation behavior, parameter precedence, required fields, and success status. It does not detail error handling or return structure, but the mention of returning the created object on success is sufficient.

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% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the interplay between template_id and preset_id (e.g., 'If both are specified, the preset_id will be used'), which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 it creates a new workflow instance for a given company, differentiating from sibling tools like 'create_a_workflow_instance_project' by specifying the company scope. It also explains the optional template_id and preset_id parameters, enhancing clarity.

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?

The description mentions 'Use this to create a new Workflows in Procore' and lists required parameters, but does not explicitly contrast with other workflow tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The differentiation from the project-level sibling is implicit via the tool name and title.

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