openmeter_dead_letter_retry

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the retry resets the attempt count so the outbox worker picks the events up again, but it omits permissions, rate limits, idempotency, and whether this can re-trigger failures.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler, and the core action plus its consequence are front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose and side effect but leaves parameter semantics and operational safety details incomplete. It is minimally adequate but not fully self-contained.

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 50%: orgId is documented in the schema, but maxEvents only has default and range constraints without a description. The tool description does not mention either parameter or explain that maxEvents caps how many dead-letter events are retried, so it fails to compensate for the gap.

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 uses a specific verb (Retry) and resource (dead-letter events that have failed max attempts), making the purpose immediately clear. It does not, however, differentiate from sibling tools such as openmeter_outbox_health, so it falls short of a 5.

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 qualifying condition — events that have failed max attempts — clearly indicates when this tool applies. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative, but the context is sufficiently clear for the agent to route correctly.

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