build_custom_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states the tool's purpose and alternatives, but fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as whether it creates a new workflow, modifies an existing one, requires authentication, or has any side effects.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and immediately followed by guidance on alternatives. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters including nested objects, and no output schema. The description is too brief to cover the tool's complexity. It does not explain what the tool returns, how iteration limits work, or typical usage patterns, leaving gaps for an AI agent to understand the full context.

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 schema already describes parameters well with coverage of 67%. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond stating 'full control over phases and configuration', which is already implied by the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Build' with 'custom workflow' as the resource, clearly distinguishing the tool's purpose. It explicitly contrasts with sibling tools by noting that optimized presets are available via refactor_workflow, create_feature_workflow, etc.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('for full control') vs when to use alternatives ('Use specific workflow tools for optimized presets'). This gives a clear decision criterion.

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