flow-add-step

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the recording behavior, return values (success and error), and special handling for certain tool types. It does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or side effects beyond recording, but covers the main behaviors adequately.

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 concise at around 150 words, with key information front-loaded. It follows a logical structure: purpose, usage context, special cases, return value, error handling, and cleanup tip. No unnecessary words.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides sufficient context: when to use, what it does, special behaviors for specific commands, return format, and error handling. It could be considered complete for its purpose, lacking only minor details about prerequisites (e.g., must be in recording mode).

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameters themselves, so a 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: execute a tool call and record it as a step in the active flow. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like flow-add-echo and flow-execute by specifying the recording context.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool ('Use when recording a flow with flow-start-recording and you want to run and capture each action') and provides guidance on special cases like gesture-tap and restart-app. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for non-recording scenarios.

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