Retry failed clip job (free)

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

Annotations only carry the generic safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=false). The description adds the semantics those annotations cannot: it is free, preserves job_id, refuses certain state combinations, and returns the job with status queued. This is genuine behavioral context beyond structured hints.

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-loads purpose, then exclusions/alternatives, then failure triage, then the return status and the next call. Every sentence carries a distinct obligation; no filler.

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 a 1-param, single-purpose retry tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the gaps that matter: what state is required, what is refused, what happens to a completed job, and what to do next. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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% and the single job_id parameter is fully described in the schema (pattern, hex length, which tools produce it). The description adds no syntax or format detail, so the baseline 3 for schema-heavy tools is correct.

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?

States a precise verb+resource ('Re-runs a failed clip job with the same settings, free of charge, keeping the same job_id') and distinguishes itself from siblings recut_clip_job and get_clip_job by name. The agent can tell exactly what the tool does without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('when get_clip_job shows status failed'), when-not ('refuses jobs that are queued or processing... completed jobs'), and names the alternative (recut_clip_job) with the condition that selects it. Also recommends check_video_source for a repeating failure. Nothing is left to inference.

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