retry_retry_shell

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

The description discloses automatic retry on non-zero exit and exponential back-off, but lacks details on default max_attempts (null behavior), side effects (output capture), and environment constraints. No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden but only partially meets it.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action verb 'Run', and includes essential keywords (shell command, automatic retry, exponential back-off). No wasted words.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain parameter defaults or the behavior of null values for max_attempts. For a tool with four parameters and a retry pattern, more context is needed for proper invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not explain any of the four parameters beyond the implicit 'command'. Terms like max_attempts, delay_seconds, and backoff_factor are not elaborated, leaving the agent to infer from names and defaults.

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 clearly states it runs a shell command with automatic retry, distinguishing it from sibling tools like retry_retry_http (HTTP) and process_run (without retry). It also mentions exponential back-off, making the purpose specific and 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?

The description implies usage when a shell command may fail and needs retry, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives (e.g., process_run for single attempts). No exclusion criteria or context about prerequisites is given.

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