tracecat_delete_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'permanently', which hints at irreversibility but does not explain cascading effects (e.g., deletion of associated executions, schedules, webhooks), required permissions, or whether the workflow must be undeployed first.

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 a single four-word sentence that is front-loaded with the verb. Every word earns its place with no 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 one-parameter delete tool, the description is functional but minimal. It could be considered adequate for a straightforward operation, yet it lacks details about side effects, idempotency, or error conditions that would fully inform an AI agent, especially given the absence of output schema and annotations.

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 input schema has one parameter (workflow_id) with a clear description 'Workflow ID'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a workflow permanently' clearly states the action and the resource (workflow), and the adverb 'permanently' adds important context. Among many sibling delete tools, it is clearly distinguished by resource type.

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, prerequisites, or what happens if the workflow is currently running or deployed. Alternatives like tracecat_validate_workflow or tracecat_deploy_workflow are not mentioned.

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