AI Agent Development:
A Trace Map for Tool Failures

A six-field review worksheet

Dmytro Nasyrov PhD

Caller status and tool outcome

Question

Current record

Did the caller receive a response?

The caller reports a timeout.

Did the tool create the ticket?

The tool outcome remains unknown.

Both observations can hold at the same time. The map keeps the missing tool evidence visible.

The six fields in the trace map

Field

Review job

Task reference

Identify the workflow and intended action.

Tool and revision

Identify the operation and implementation version.

Safe input reference

Locate permitted evidence for the submitted arguments.

Attempt relationship

Connect the call to its originating task and earlier attempt.

Caller observation

Record the returned status or local error.

Tool outcome and evidence gap

Separate the external result from the unresolved question.

A synthetic ticket request

Hypothetical workflow: task T-42 asks a tool to create a support ticket. No real request or test.

Field

Example value

Task reference

T-42 / create a support ticket

Tool and revision

create_ticket / revision r7

Safe input reference

payload/T-42/v3 / synthetic record

Attempt relationship

A1 / original attempt for T-42

Caller observation

timeout

Tool outcome and evidence gap

unknown / provider acceptance evidence unavailable

The unresolved evidence gap

Observation

Evidence available

Open question

Caller timeout

Synthetic caller record for A1

What happened at the provider?

Tool outcome unknown

No provider acceptance evidence

Did the provider create a ticket?

Ask the service owner for an approved way to reconcile the request. Keep the outcome unknown until that evidence resolves it.

Record who owns the next check and which evidence can close the question.

The relationship between attempts

Attempt

Relationship

State in this example

A1

Original call for T-42

Caller timeout / tool outcome unknown

A2

Proposed follow-up linked to A1

Proposal only / no execution

An attempt link explains the relationship. It supplies no evidence that either attempt completed.

A proposed retry needs a decision under the tool contract and the applicable action permissions.

Application labels and trace identifiers

OpenTelemetry span context includes a TraceId and SpanId. Parent-child spans relate operations within a trace.

T-42 and A1 are application teaching labels. Keep the application task and attempt references alongside the identifiers from your tracing system.

A span status describes its operation. Reconciliation of the ticket still needs evidence from the tool.

Source: OpenTelemetry Tracing API

Input references and access

Use an input reference approved for investigation. The synthetic value payload/T-42/v3 points to no real customer data.

Define who may read the referenced record and how long to retain it.

W3C Trace Context excludes sensitive information from traceparent and tracestate. Payload logging needs its own approved policy.

Source: W3C Trace Context, privacy considerations

Trace requirements in the delivery scope

When a failed tool call leaves the outcome unresolved, Pharos Production offers AI agent development covering tool integration and evaluation. Agree trace evidence and action permissions within the implementation scope.

The map gives the reviewer a proposed record of the open question. A completed worksheet alone does not establish successful tool execution.

About the author

Written by Dmytro Nasyrov PhD, software architect with 24 years of production experience. Dmytro is the founder and CTO of Pharos Production. He works on production software architecture for FinTech, AI, Web3 and blockchain systems.

Dmytro Nasyrov. Photo supplied by the author.