pipeline_retry_step

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains that it re-runs the step and, if successful, continues remaining steps. However, it omits details like error handling, state requirements, or what happens if the step fails again.

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 concise: three sentences total. The first sentence gives a clear high-level purpose, followed by an Args section for parameters. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded.

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 tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and parameter meanings. It lacks details on return values or error cases, but given the simplicity, it is largely complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description manually documents both parameters with meaningful roles: 'execution_id' as pipeline execution ID and 'step_index' as zero-based index. This adds value beyond the schema titles.

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 a specific failed step in a pipeline'—a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pipeline_abort or pipeline_resume by focusing on retrying a single step, not the entire 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?

The description implies use when a step has failed and should be retried, and the context of continuing from that step is clear. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternative tools, though siblings are present.

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