task_replay

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It describes the return content in detail but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or disclose side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. It implies a query operation but lacks explicit behavioral statements.

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 and well-structured: a one-line purpose summary followed by a bullet list of return components and a usage sentence. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (timeline, checkpoints, stats) and provides usage context. No additional information is necessary for adequate understanding.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's 'Task ID to replay' for the single parameter. No enrichment or usage details are provided for task_id.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Get full execution replay for a task — timeline, checkpoints, stats.' It uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'execution replay,' and distinguishes from similar siblings like 'task_execution_trace' by detailing unique outputs (timeline, checkpoints, stats).

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 provides clear usage context: 'Use this to review how a task was executed, understand the decision trail, or audit agent behavior post-completion.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among siblings (e.g., task_execution_trace).

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