nexo_run_workflow

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions durability and public API, omitting behavioral traits like idempotency (despite idempotency_key parameter), state implications, or error handling. Does not disclose whether it creates a new workflow or continues an existing one.

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?

Single sentence is concise but fails to convey necessary information. Every sentence should earn its place; this one is too vague to be useful.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete for a high-level workflow entry point. An AI agent cannot determine correct usage without more detail.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description adds no explanation for the 7 parameters (sid, goal, steps, goal_id, shared_state, owner, idempotency_key), leaving them entirely unspecified.

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 'High-level durable workflow entry point for the public API surface' indicates a starting point for workflows but is vague about actions (run, create, submit?). It distinguishes from siblings like nexo_workflow_get loosely, but lacks a specific verb+resource.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like nexo_workflow_open, nexo_workflow_resume, or nexo_workflow_handoff. The description does not specify context or exclusions.

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