workflow_claim

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

Discloses atomicity, concurrency safety (exactly one succeeds), and sidecar state preservation. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and does so comprehensively.

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?

Seven structured sentences with front-loaded key statement. Each sentence adds value 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?

Covers all essential aspects for an atomic claim tool: success conditions, concurrency, lifecycle integration, and return value indication ('claimed=False with a reason'). Output schema exists but description supplements it well.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by identifying run_id as the workflow identifier and agent_id as the claiming agent. Missing explicit format or constraints, but context makes it clear.

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 atomically claims a workflow for this agent. It specifies the resource (workflow) and action (claim), and distinguishes from siblings like workflow_create and workflow_discover by noting their roles in the lifecycle.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (first step via claim) and when it fails (if not 'created' state or already claimed). Provides sequential guidance: call workflow_checkpoint after steps, and use workflow_discover + workflow_claim for crash recovery.

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