md_task_retry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'preflight' and 'new immutable task,' but does not disclose side effects on the original task, authorization requirements, or the confirmation flow, leaving significant behavioral gaps 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?

A single, focused sentence that gets straight to the point. No filler or redundant information.

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, the description omits critical workflow context: how preflight relates to dry_run, when confirmation_token is needed, and what the retry actually does to the original task. The tool's complexity is not fully addressed.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of task_id, owner_capability, dry_run, or confirmation_token. The name 'owner_capability' and 'confirmation_token' are not self-explanatory, so the description fails to compensate for the missing schema details.

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 an owned failed or cancelled task as a new immutable task. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'failed or cancelled' and 'owned' distinguish it from sibling tools like submit, query, and cancel.

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 implies when to use this tool: for an owned task that failed or was cancelled and needs to be retried. It clearly specifies the precondition without explicitly naming alternatives, which is sufficient given the sibling tool list.

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