crewai_replay_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions running a CLI command, implying a write/mutation operation, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or safety. The description adds some value by noting it's for debugging, but lacks detail on what is modified.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by the underlying command and a usage note. Each sentence is justified.

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 replay tool with two well-described parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage context. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., needing a previous execution) but is otherwise adequate.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, only referencing task_id in a CLI example. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 tool replays a crew execution from a specific task, using a specific verb ('Replay') and resource ('crew execution from a specific task'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like crewai_kickoff which starts a new execution, and crewai_test_crew which tests.

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 says 'Useful for debugging and retrying specific failed tasks,' which gives clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or compare to alternatives, but the usage intent is clear.

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