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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the mutation/safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the 'paused' precondition; it says nothing about what happens if the follow is not paused, whether resume reverses cleanly, or what state results.

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 front-loaded clause with zero filler; every word contributes to identifying the action and its target state.

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?

With an output schema, one well-documented parameter, and rich annotations, the minimum needed to call the tool correctly is present. Still missing is the failure mode when the follow is not paused and where in the follow lifecycle the resume lands, which matters for a state-transition tool.

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 100% and the single parameter already carries the crucial disambiguation ('Follow ID from following.list, not company.id'). The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Resume') and resource ('company follow') plus the required precondition state ('paused'), which implicitly separates it from the sibling following.pause. It does not name an alternative tool explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word 'paused' signals the tool applies to follows currently in a paused state, and the inverse sibling following.pause exists but is never referenced. No explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or prerequisite (e.g., 'call after following.list') is given in the description.

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