create_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It states 'Pure local generation — does not contact ComfyUI and has no side effects', and warns that the result may reference missing models. This adequately discloses non-destructive behavior and a key limitation.

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 efficient paragraph, front-loaded with purpose and behavior, then usage guidance, then a caveat. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or 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?

Given no output schema, the description mentions the return value ('Returns the complete workflow JSON') and its purpose. It also addresses the complexity of nested params and potential model unavailability, leaving no critical gaps.

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 100% and the description adds significant value: it lists the template enum values, details the params object keys per template, and explains fallback behavior and unknown key handling—far exceeding what the schema provides.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Create a ready-to-run ComfyUI API-format workflow from a built-in template'. It lists all six templates, distinguishing it from sibling tools like validate_workflow and enqueue_workflow.

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 explains that the tool is for local generation without side effects, and directs the user to pass the result to validate_workflow or enqueue_workflow. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear.

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