retry_migration_job

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

The description discloses the state transition ('reset to READY and picked up by the worker again'), which goes beyond the annotations. This gives the agent useful knowledge about side effects even though readOnlyHint is false and destructiveHint is false.

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?

Three short sentences, each adding essential information: what the tool does, the precondition, the effect, and the prerequisite call. No filler or redundant phrasing.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the action, precondition, effect, and prerequisite lookup. Nothing critical is missing for an agent 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 jobId parameter is already described as 'Migration job ID (from get_migration_jobs)'. The description reinforces this by telling the agent to call get_migration_jobs first, but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 a failed migration job') and the target resource, and adds the state transition from FAILED to READY. This distinguishes it from siblings like retry_sync_run, skip_migration_job, and complete_migration_job.

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 a concrete precondition ('must be in FAILED status') and a clear prerequisite workflow ('Use get_migration_jobs first to find the failed job's ID and error message'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for correct usage.

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