Get Pre-Built Workflow Template

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the template is deterministically ordered, each step is matched by category and GateOnAI Score, and it is regenerated live from current tool data rather than being a static snapshot. That live-regeneration note is the kind of context an agent needs to reason about result freshness.

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?

Two tight sentences that front-load what is returned and then handle the sibling differentiation. It is dense but every clause carries information; the hyphenated parenthetical is slightly overloaded but still readable and earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value shape need not be described. The description covers what the artifact is, where it comes from, how ordering is determined, and how it relates to the competing generator tool - sufficient for an agent to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 100% and the single parameter's description already supplies examples and a fallback path, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates that the parameter selects 'a specific profession' and adds no slug syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('get a pre-built workflow template'), plus scope (2,957+ templates for a specific profession) and the nature of the artifact (deterministic ordered step sequence matched to real tools). It explicitly names sibling get_ai_workflow and contrasts the two, so an agent can disambiguate without opening schemas.

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 this versus the alternative ('curated template for a known profession rather than generating a new custom one from free text - faster and more consistent for common roles'). The schema reinforces the inverse condition: if unsure of the slug, use get_ai_workflow. Both directions of the routing decision are covered.

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