approve

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

Discloses that it is a write operation ([WRITE]), and goes beyond annotations by specifying that remaining steps become 'not_executed' and the result includes 'pending_dispatch' and outcome='dispatch_required'. No contradiction with annotations.

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 with a clear structure: action statement, condition, parameter list, special note, and return value. No redundant sentences.

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?

Covers purpose, usage condition, parameters, behavioral side effects (dispatch requirement), and return type. Adequate for a simple mutation tool with no output schema.

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 has 0% coverage, but the description's Args section explicitly defines both parameters: workflow_id as the ID to approve and approver as the auditor name. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states it approves a workflow waiting for human confirmation, using the verb 'approve' and resource 'workflow'. The condition on state 'awaiting_approval' distinguishes it from sibling tools like cancel_workflow or review_workflow.

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?

Provides clear condition ('Only works when workflow state is 'awaiting_approval'), and explains the outcome including the need for the agent to handle pending dispatch steps. This tells when to use and what to expect.

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