ai-fail_work_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, reversibility, required states, or response behavior. For a mutation tool, more detail is needed.

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 extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the action and efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 required parameters, no output schema) and no annotations, the description is minimal but covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks edge-case context and post-action behavior, which would be helpful for an AI agent.

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 both parameters described. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema (e.g., format constraints or usage tips). Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Marks a work item as failed with an error message' uses a specific verb 'marks' and resource 'work item', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like ai-complete_work_item or ai-cancel_work_item. It adds context by specifying 'with an error message', which goes beyond the name alone.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ai-cancel_work_item or ai-claim_work_item. The description does not mention prerequisites, state constraints, or exclusions.

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