run_once

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns execution details but does not specify what those details are, nor does it mention side effects like creating an execution record or resource consumption. The phrase 'manually once' implies no recurrence but lacks further context.

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 concise sentence, but it lacks structure such as front-loading or sections. While short, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, earning a mid-range score.

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 tool with 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to use the parameters, what the execution details include, error conditions, or any constraints, making it inadequate for agents to invoke correctly.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no meaning to the parameters. WorkflowId's possible types (string or number) and the purpose of the 'input' object are unexplained, relying entirely on the schema without additional context.

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 action (execute), the resource (workflow), the execution mode (manually once), and the return value (execution details). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like activate_workflow or deactivate_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as activate_workflow for scheduled runs or get_execution for viewing past runs. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., workflow must be active) or when not to use.

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