df_flow_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses the auto-execution behavior (the AI runs it when trigger matches), which is valuable. However, it omits other behavioral details such as idempotency, overwrite behavior, or error conditions.

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 concise sentences. The purpose is front-loaded, and the behavioral note about trigger execution is added without unnecessary fluff. Every word contributes value.

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?

With 3 required parameters fully described in the schema and a concise description covering purpose and auto-execution, the tool is largely usable. However, it lacks details on error handling, idempotency, or what happens if a flow with the same name exists, which would be helpful for safe invocation.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100% – all three parameters (name, trigger, steps) have descriptions. The description only restates these parameter names without adding new semantics or examples beyond what the schema already 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 verb 'Crear' (create) with the resource 'flow (playbook)' and lists the key attributes (name, trigger, steps). It also explains the tool's role in the system (executed when trigger matches), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like df_flow_update or df_flow_delete.

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 implies creation but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like df_flow_update or df_flow_delete. It mentions the trigger execution context, which gives some situational guidance, but lacks explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use language.

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