Retry a failed post

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: retrying may be a no-op if the failure is due to text length or a disconnected account, and a prerequisite read is required.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence establishes the purpose, the second provides critical usage guidance. The structure is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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?

The tool's core behavior, precondition, and principal failure cases are covered. An output schema exists to describe return values, and annotations cover idempotency and destructiveness, so the description is sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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 description does not explain either parameter directly, but id_publication is strongly inferable from the tool name and 'failed post', and id_organization already has a schema description. It links id_publication to the get_publication workflow, adding minimal but useful meaning.

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 states a specific action ('try a failed post again') on a specific resource (a failed post/publication), clearly distinguishing it from create_publication and update_publication. The failure context is explicit and immediately useful.

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 explicitly tells the agent to read get_publication first and identifies two failure causes where retrying is pointless. It does not name a concrete alternative fix action, but it gives clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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