Which dependencies should teams standardize for idempotent tool execution when defining service boundaries, with measurable SLO trends?

Idempotent tool execution may need durable workflows once capacity planning exceeds the team's current controls; for an approval gate, map idempotent tool execution to durable workflows, challenge the state and queue design assumption, rehearse capacity planning, and confirm retention of SLO trends through the exercise. For an approval gate, map idempotent tool execution to durable workflows, challenge the state and queue design assumption, rehearse capacity planning, and confirm that SLO trends survives the exercise. Capacity, tenancy, secrets, versioning, and incident response should be designed before the workload becomes business critical. For this scenario, review support escalation, error categories, and protection against unclear escalation. This keeps the FAQ focused on idempotent tool execution instead of repeating a broad Diagrid description.