ds_delete_workflow

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'takes offline first,' that batch deletions are independent, and that one failure doesn't block others. It also documents return structures for both single and batch modes, providing useful behavioral detail beyond the simple 'delete' label.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses clear sections (Args, Returns) and examples. It includes a version note and batch behavior details, all of which are useful. Slightly verbose but well-structured.

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 the tool has only two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is quite complete. It covers purpose, argument semantics, batch behavior, and return formats for both single and batch modes, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does. It explains project_name, clarifies that workflow_code can be an int for single delete or a list for batch delete, and provides concrete numeric examples. This resolves the ambiguity in the schema's anyOf definition.

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 opens with 'Delete workflow(s) by code' which clearly states the specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like ds_delete_project, ds_delete_process_instance, and ds_delete_resource by focusing on deleting workflows and by their unique code.

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?

It clearly conveys when to use the tool (deleting single or multiple workflows by code) and gives concrete examples. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is clear and there are no misleading exclusions.

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