transkribus_job_restart_all_by_userRestart every job associated with a specific user ID. Provide the user ID to requeue all their Transkribus jobs.
Restart all jobs for a specific user.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| userid | Yes | User ID whose jobs to restart |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'restart', such as side effects, permission requirements, or what 'restart' entails (e.g., aborting and re-running jobs).
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 a single sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately concise for a tool with one parameter, though it could include slightly more context without losing conciseness.
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 action (restarting all jobs) and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'restart' does precisely, required permissions, or potential consequences, leaving the agent under-informed.
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% with a single parameter 'userid' described as 'User ID whose jobs to restart'. The description ('for a specific user') adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.
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 ('restart') and the target ('all jobs for a specific user'). The name includes 'restart_all_by_user', which differentiates it from siblings like 'job_kill' or 'job_undo' that perform different operations on 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'job_kill' or 'job_undo'). It does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.