import_flow

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

The description mentions 'compile+dry-run gated', implying a two-step validation before import, but it is vague about whether the tool performs those steps or requires prior completion. No annotations exist to clarify.

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?

Very concise (one sentence), but it is front-loaded with the key action. However, it omits important details, making it under-informative for the complexity of the tool.

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 description does not mention return values (though output schema exists, it's not shown), nor does it explain the import process or consequences. For a tool with nested schemas, this is insufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and one required complex parameter 'envelope', the description does not explain its structure or how to construct it, failing to add value beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'Import' and the resource 'flow from an exported envelope'. It also adds 'compile+dry-run gated' to distinguish behavior from siblings like export_flow or create_flow.

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 vs alternatives. The phrase 'compile+dry-run gated' hints at prerequisites but does not explicitly state when-not or provide alternative tool names.

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