github_rerun_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates the key behavioral distinction between rerunning all jobs and only failed jobs, but does not mention side effects such as creating a new run, permission requirements, or any rate limits. This is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and immediately explains the only decision point (mode). Every word earns its place, with no redundant or tangential content.

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 rerun operation with a fully described schema, the description covers the essential behavior and mode choice. It lacks preconditions such as the run needing to be in a completed state, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, meaning every parameter already has a clear description. The tool description merely restates the mode enum, adding no new semantic detail beyond what is in the schema. This meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 the specific verb 'Rerun' and resource 'GitHub Actions workflow', making the tool's function unambiguous. It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools like github_cancel_workflow or github_list_workflow_runs.

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 explains the two operational modes ('all' vs 'failed') which is helpful for parameter selection, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_cancel_workflow. The intended use case is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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