Workflows: disable

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false. The description adds nothing beyond them: it does not say whether disabling is reversible, whether it affects in-flight runs or jobs (cf. workflows_jobs), or whether it requires ownership/admin rights. With annotations present the bar is lower, but zero added context leaves the call semantics ambiguous.

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 terse sentence with no waste and the operation front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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 toggle with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate, and annotations cover the safety profile. It still omits what disabling means operationally (reversibility, effect on runs/jobs, required permissions), which an agent invoking a mutating toggle would benefit from knowing.

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 description coverage is 100% — the single 'id' parameter is fully documented as 'Workflow ID' — so the description carries no extra burden. It adds no format hints or constraints, which matches the baseline 3 for fully covered schemas.

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 states a clear verb+resource ('Disable a workflow'), so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not, however, distinguish this from siblings like workflows_enable or workflows_delete, which operate on the same resource.

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?

There is no guidance on when to disable versus delete or update a workflow, and no mention of the obvious complementary tool workflows_enable. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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