ci_workflows_create_instance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses almost nothing: no auth/permission requirements, no side effects, no note on what resources must already exist (e.g. a CI product or SCM repository). The only signal is the implicit 'POST = create mutation' from the path.

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 path 'POST /v1/ciWorkflows' is printed twice verbatim, wasting the only sentence budget on redundancy. It is short but not efficient — the duplicated fragment should have been replaced with actual purpose or usage content.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, an agent needs to know the prerequisites, side effects, and what the JSON:API envelope requires. The description defers entirely to an external OpenAPI component that the agent may not have, leaving it under-informed for correct 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?

Schema coverage is 100% (the single body parameter is described), so the baseline is 3. The description's pointer to 'components.schemas.CiWorkflowCreateRequest' duplicates the schema's own text rather than adding meaning, but the high coverage keeps this at minimum-viable.

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 only restates the HTTP verb and path ('POST /v1/ciWorkflows'), which is already implied by the name 'ci_workflows_create_instance'. It does not explain what a CI workflow is or what creating one accomplishes, so it adds nothing beyond the tool name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus siblings like ci_workflows_update_instance, ci_workflows_get_instance, or ci_products_create_instance. No prerequisites, no mention of required CI product/repository context, no alternatives.

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