workflow_blueprint_run

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'replay' but omits what that entails (e.g., state changes, authentication needs, error handling). The behavioral impact is underspecified.

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?

One sentence of 10 words, front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose; no redundancy.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description omits behavioral details, parameter explanations, and usage context. It is insufficient for an agent to use the tool safely and effectively.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It hints that 'inputs' are for string replacements, but does not explain the 'name' parameter or the structure of 'inputs'. Partial compensation.

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?

Clearly states it replays a saved workflow blueprint with optional string replacements. The phrase 'no planner call' differentiates it from sibling planning tools, making the purpose distinct.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Only a hint that it avoids planner calls, but no context on prerequisites or when to choose this over other workflow-related tools.

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