delete_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it mentions that in-flight steps may need separate cancellation, it does not state whether deletion is irreversible, what permissions are required, or what actually happens to associated steps. This is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word earns its place. No unnecessary detail.

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 simple delete with one parameter, the description is reasonably complete, but the caveat about in-flight steps is ambiguous (e.g., under what conditions they need cancellation, whether deletion succeeds regardless). No output schema exists to clarify behavior, leaving some gaps.

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%, but the property description 'ID of the resource' is generic and does not specify it is the workflow ID. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states 'Delete a workflow' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_workflow_step. The additional caveat about in-flight steps further clarifies scope.

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 clear context for when to use (when a workflow needs to be deleted) and includes a practical caveat that in-flight workflow_steps may need separate cancellation. It does not name explicit alternatives, but the context is evident.

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