retry_parse_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the job is moved back to the durable queue, but does not mention side effects, required permissions, or whether retrying completed jobs causes duplicates. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, action first. However, it sacrifices parameter details for brevity. Could include a brief note on required vs optional parameters.

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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the core action but omits parameter semantics and return value expectations. Gaps remain for effective invocation.

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 does not explain the purpose or usage of either 'job_id' or 'token'. The schema shows they exist, but the description adds no meaning beyond that.

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 specifies the verb 'retry', the resource 'parse job', and the mechanism 'moving it back to the durable queue'. It distinguishes from sibling 'retry_failed_jobs' by focusing on a single job, and includes the scope of both failed and completed jobs.

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 usage when a parse job has failed or completed, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives like 'retry_failed_jobs'. The context is sufficient but lacks exclusion criteria.

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