delete_workflow

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only 'Returns what was removed,' which is redundant given the tool has an output schema, and it says nothing about permanence, permissions, or side effects on dependent workflows.

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 short sentences with the action and lookup key front-loaded. The second sentence is largely wasted since the output schema already describes the return value.

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 single-parameter destructive mutation with an output schema and destructiveHint, the essentials are present, so an agent can invoke it. However, nothing warns that the deletion is permanent or describes the effect on anything referencing the workflow, which is meaningful context for a delete operation.

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%, so the schema already documents the single parameter and the baseline is 3. The phrase 'by name' mildly reinforces name-based lookup, but the schema's own description oddly references variables and saved requests rather than workflows, and the description does not resolve that mismatch.

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 and resource ('Remove a workflow') plus the lookup key ('by name'), which separates it cleanly from delete_variable and delete_saved_request among the siblings. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 says what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives such as delete_saved_request or set_group, nor any prerequisites or warnings about irreversible deletion. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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