flow_import_character

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the high-level action, without detailing side effects (e.g., overwriting existing characters), validation of the JSON, error handling, or any prerequisites. This is a significant gap for an import tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 core purpose is clear and the schema covers parameters, but the description lacks usage guidance relative to sibling tools and does not disclose behavioral traits (e.g., whether it overwrites or merges). For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent deciding between import and create.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (campaign, file_path, project_name), giving 100% schema coverage. The description itself adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Import') with a clear resource ('character') and source/destination ('saved JSON file' into 'Google Flow'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like flow_create_character (which creates from scratch) and flow_open_characters (which opens existing characters).

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 implies usage when a saved JSON character file exists, but it offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and does not mention alternative tools such as flow_create_character. The context is inferred from the phrase 'saved JSON file' rather than stated directly.

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