update-flows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'updates' but does not warn that this action overwrites all existing flows (destructive), nor does it mention prerequisites or consequences.

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 consists of two concise sentences: the first states the purpose, the second provides parameter details with an example. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded.

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 purpose (replacing entire flow configuration) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is mostly adequate but lacks crucial context about the destructive nature and what happens to existing flows. It is complete for basic understanding but not for safe usage.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter, but the description adds value by providing a concrete example of the expected JSON format, including fields like 'type', 'id', and 'label', which is beyond the schema's generic 'Flow configuration in JSON'.

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 'Updates' and the resource 'entire flow configuration of the Node-RED instance', distinguishing it from siblings like 'update-flow' (single flow) and 'backup-flows'.

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 that the tool is used to replace the entire flow configuration, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'update-flow' or 'set-flows-state', and does not state exclusions.

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