linear_createWorkflowState

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

The description simply restates the mutation intent ('create') without adding behavioral detail. It does not disclose constraints like uniqueness of names, allowed type values, color format, position handling, or what happens on duplicate creation, and the annotations provide only basic write hints.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words and is immediately clear about the core action. It is concise but extremely minimal, roughly restating the tool name rather than adding meaningful elaboration.

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?

For a create operation with required fields like 'type' and 'color' that have no enums or format hints, the description leaves the agent without enough context to correctly populate these parameters. Even though an output schema exists, no guidance is provided on domain-specific constraints or how this tool fits into the broader workflow management flow.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters and their basic meanings. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, such as what 'type' values are valid or how 'position' affects ordering.

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 states a specific verb ('create') and resource ('workflow state'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like linear_updateWorkflowState and linear_getWorkflowStates. However, it provides no additional context about workflow states beyond the name and requires domain knowledge to understand what a workflow state actually is.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as linear_updateWorkflowState or linear_getWorkflowStates. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it relates to team workflow configuration.

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