Retry Now

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but 'schedule' only vaguely implies a side effect. It does not say whether scheduling is idempotent, whether it replaces an existing retry, whether it mutates chain state, or whether it requires a current run to be finished.

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 six-word sentence with no filler and is appropriately front-loaded. It is concise, though at the cost of omitting useful context.

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?

The tool is simple, has a single parameter, and provides an output schema, but the description still leaves key gaps: no guidance on when a retry is valid, no explanation of scheduling semantics, and no behavioral context. An agent can only guess at the effects or prerequisites.

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%, and the description does not explain chain_id beyond echoing the schema property name. The integer type and required flag are helpful, but the description adds no meaning about what the identifier must reference.

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 action and object: 'Schedule a chain for immediate retry.' This makes it distinct from sibling tools like list_chains or pause_chain, though it does not explicitly name the alternative it should not be confused with.

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 conditions for when retry_now should be chosen instead of resume_chain or create_issue_now, nor does it mention prerequisites such as the chain being in a failed or paused state. An agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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