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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that the hunter is resumed but does not disclose what resuming means operationally, whether it consumes credits, what happens if the hunter is already active, or whether the action is reversible.

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?

The description is a single clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though the brevity contributes to gaps in usage and behavioral context rather than being a flaw of structure alone.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and only partial parameter documentation, the description is too thin for a mutation tool. It does not cover prerequisites, error cases, effects on the search, or when the tool should not be used.

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 description coverage is only 50%: the source enum has a description, but search_id is an undocumented UUID. The tile description does not explain either parameter, does not clarify the relationship between search_id and source, and adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb and resource: 'Resumes one paused hunter of a search.' This clearly distinguishes resuming a single hunter from broader search-level operations, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as sdr_resume_search or sdr_activate_search.

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 phrase 'paused hunter' implies the usage condition, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to related tools like sdr_resume_search or sdr_pause_hunter. The agent must infer the appropriate context from the purpose statement alone.

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