gitlab_retry_pipeline

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it retries failed jobs. It does not disclose important behaviors such as idempotency, side effects on non-failed jobs, authentication needs, or rate limits. Insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 very short (two sentences plus args list) but lacks structure. It conveys purpose efficiently but could be more informative without adding length. Mediocre conciseness; not wasteful but not optimized.

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 (which reduces need to explain returns), the description omits prerequisites like pipeline existence, user permissions, and what happens if the pipeline is already retrying. Incomplete for a reliable agent decision.

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%, yet the description adds minimal context: pipeline_id is numeric, project_path is a GitLab path with example 'group/project'. It does not explain where to find these values or specify format constraints. Some value but far from compensating for the coverage gap.

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 'Retry all failed jobs in a pipeline.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_retry_job (single job) and gitlab_trigger_pipeline (new pipeline).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it retries only failed jobs, nor does it suggest conditions like pipeline existence or permissions. No explicit when-not or alternatives are provided.

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