retry-workflow

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds a 'MEDIUM RISK' warning and the 'may DEFER if loop threshold exceeded' caveat, which are valuable. However, it does not explain what deferral means, potential side effects, or how retryCount affects behavior, leaving significant gaps.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and adds a succinct risk qualifier. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with a well-documented schema, the description is minimally viable. However, it omits important operational context such as what happens on success/failure, how loop thresholds are determined, or what 'DEFER' entails, making it incomplete for an agent needing full behavioral 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?

The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters, with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level information, but the high schema coverage means the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Retry') and the resource ('a failing workflow'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes this from siblings like research-topic or deploy-changes, which involve different operations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies use for failing workflows but doesn't state prerequisites, exclusions, or mention that retrying might not be appropriate in certain conditions beyond the vague 'may DEFER' note.

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