workflow.remove

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Remove workflow activity,' which implies a destructive action but doesn't clarify whether the removal is reversible, what side effects occur (e.g., updated graph), or required permissions. The agent lacks critical safety 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?

The description is a single, minimal sentence. While concise, it omits any structure such as parameter hints, examples, or usage notes. It does not earn its place by providing value beyond the tool name.

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 the complexity of a tool with three undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, error cases, prerequisites, or how this tool fits among siblings like workflow.insert or memory.remove. The agent cannot use this tool safely or effectively.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no information about the three parameters (activity, session_id, workflow_name). The agent cannot infer what 'activity' refers to (ID, name?), the role of session_id, or when workflow_name is needed. This is a critical gap.

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 states 'Remove workflow activity,' which clearly indicates the action (remove) and resource (workflow activity). The name and context further differentiate it from memory.remove. However, it lacks specificity about what constitutes a workflow activity and doesn't elaborate beyond the name itself.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus other workflow manipulation tools like workflow.insert or workflow.clone. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., open session, existing activity) or scenarios where removal is appropriate. The description provides no decision-making support.

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