Applying a automation

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

Description adds the permission requirement 'Perm: run_automations', but annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. No additional behavioral details (e.g., side effects, confirmation steps) are provided beyond annotations.

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 short (two sentences) but includes an incomplete sentence ('in the specified'). The permission line is concise but could be integrated better. Not overly verbose, but grammar issues detract.

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 destructive tool with required confirm parameter and output schema, the description fails to explain the dry_run behavior, the confirm requirement, or what the output contains. OpenWorldHint and destructiveHint require more 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for body, org_id, confirm, dry_run. The tool description does not add any additional parameter meaning, so baseline score 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?

Description states it applies an automation and immediately runs an instance on specified endpoints, which clearly identifies the tool's primary action. However, the phrase 'in the specified' is incomplete, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like action1_create_automation_schedule or when not to use it. The only hint is 'immediately runs', implying it's for immediate execution, but no explicit context.

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