Change a Homey advanced flow

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the destructive replace-all semantics, the label-to-real-id rewriting, and the ethical constraint that enabling an off flow requires owner confirmation. This gives the agent a clear model of side effects that the schema and annotations alone do not fully convey.

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 dense but not wasteful; every sentence contributes essential information about advanced flow semantics, syntax, replacement behavior, or confirmation requirements. It could have been slightly easier to scan with bullets, but it is appropriately sized 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?

Given the tool's complexity and the rich input schema, the description is remarkably complete: it explains the graph model, token references, replace semantics, prerequisite reading, and confirmation requirements. No output schema exists, but the description does not need to explain return values because the critical invocation context is fully covered.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds crucial cross-parameter semantics: card labels are user-provided keys replaced by real ids, token references use [[trigger::label::token]] syntax, and confirmEnable is not just a flag but a deliberate owner-approval step. This meaningfully clarifies how the cards array and confirmation parameters interact.

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 title and description clearly state this tool changes a Homey advanced flow, and the description explains that an advanced flow is a graph of cards rather than a simple trigger/action list. It also distinguishes the advanced flow syntax from standard flow syntax, so an agent can tell this apart from homey_flow_update or homey_advancedflow_create.

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 gives concrete guidance on when to use the tool: it says to read the current flow with homey_flow_get first, warns that the whole graph is replaced, and explains when confirm and confirmEnable are needed. It does not explicitly name homey_flow_update as the standard-flow alternative, but the advanced-flow framing and token syntax warning effectively imply the distinction.

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