restart_build

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, open-world). The description adds value beyond them by disclosing the permission requirement ('restart rights') and the state constraint (only finished builds), both operationally important. It stops short of saying whether prior logs/results are discarded or a new build ID is produced.

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?

A single tight sentence with the verb and the key constraint front-loaded and no wasted wording; the terseness borders on under-specification but stays efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the auth prerequisite is stated. Still missing are the consequences of re-queueing (fate of prior build artifacts/logs, whether a new build id is returned) that matter for a mutation in a CI system.

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 50%: the instance parameter is documented in-schema, but build_id has no description in either schema or prose. The description adds no parameter-level meaning at all, so it does not 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Re-queue a finished build'. The 'finished' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from cancel_build and bump_build, which act on other build states, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'needs restart rights' gives a prerequisite and 'finished build' implies an eligibility condition, but there is no explicit when-to-use-versus-alternatives guidance (e.g., when to restart vs. trigger a fresh build or bump).

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