set_workflow_decision

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It states the tool 'persists', indicating a write operation, but lacks details on side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the question is not open. It does not mention whether existing decisions are overwritten.

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 two sentences long with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and refers to another tool for further detail. However, it could be slightly more concise by combining the purpose and identifier references.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the 'by' parameter, acceptable 'answer' values, success/error behavior, or return value. The tool's mutation nature demands more context about persistence effects.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'sheet id' and 'exact question text' but does not describe the 'by' or 'answer' parameters. The 'by' parameter (likely decision maker) and 'answer' (the decision value) are left unspecified.

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: 'Answer a workflow open question — record a decision against a station/track open[] item'. It identifies the resource (open question items) and specifies the identifier (sheet id and exact question text). It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_decision' by referencing 'list_open_questions' for exact question text.

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 provides implicit guidance by stating to use 'list_open_questions' for the exact question text, implying that the question must be open. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives like 'set_decision' or 'reopen_question'.

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