Update workflow

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the PUT method and automatic stripping of read-only fields. It does not cover authentication, rate limits, or consequences of partial payloads, but provides key behavioral 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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The core action and key instruction are front-loaded.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description adequately covers usage context: how to get the payload, what to expect from the tool. Could mention error handling or response, but it's sufficient for a simple update.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the workflow parameter as 'full workflow JSON' and suggesting it comes from get_workflow, plus noting that read-only fields are stripped.

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 'Replace' and the resource 'workflow', and includes the HTTP method PUT. It distinguishes from siblings like create_workflow by specifying a replacement action.

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 advises to pass the full workflow JSON, typically from get_workflow, and notes that read-only fields are stripped. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but implies this is for content updates, not state changes.

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