retry_pipeline

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool reads the pipeline first to record prior status, is irreversible, and offers a dry-run option. This provides strong behavioral transparency.

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?

Front-loaded with [WRITE][risk=medium], followed by a clear one-sentence summary. Parameter descriptions are listed concisely. Every sentence adds value with 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?

For a retry operation with no output schema, the description covers essential context: state recording, irreversibility, dry-run, parameter details. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage, description fully explains all parameters: project (id or full path), pipeline (id from list_pipelines), dry_run (preview), target (server target from config). Adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 retries a failed/canceled pipeline, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like cancel_pipeline which cancels, and undo_apply which undoes.

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 indicates use when pipeline is failed/canceled and mentions dry_run for preview. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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