Workflows: enable

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds real runtime behavior: an enabled workflow runs automatically from Timed, Event, or Api triggers, and disabling pauses it without losing steps. That is useful context beyond the structured fields and creates no 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?

Three tight sentences with the action front-loaded, followed by the behavior change and then the alternative tool. Every sentence adds useful selection or behavior information without filler.

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 simple toggle operation, the description covers purpose, runtime behavior, trigger modes, and the workaround for pausing. With an output schema absent, no return-value explanation is required, and the annotations already carry the safety profile.

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%, and the single `id` parameter is already documented as 'Workflow ID. Find it with workflows_list.' The description adds no parameter details, so the schema carries the full burden. Baseline 3 is correct for a high-coverage single-parameter schema.

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?

Specifically states the verb and resource: 'Enable a workflow.' It clearly distinguishes the action from the sibling `workflows_disable` and from adjacent workflow tools by explaining what enabling actually activates.

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?

Provides explicit routing guidance by naming the alternative tool and the condition for choosing it: 'Use `workflows_disable` to pause it without losing its steps.' This tells the agent when to use enable and when to use its counterpart.

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