resume_campaign
Resume a paused campaign — reactivates all paused schedules
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Resume a paused campaign — reactivates all paused schedules
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the main effect (reactivating paused schedules) but does not mention potential side effects, error conditions, or required permissions. The core behavior is covered, but details are minimal.
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 sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and scope.
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?
Given one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the core functionality. It could mention that the campaign must be paused or clarify return behavior, but for a simple resume operation, it is nearly complete.
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 0%, so the description should compensate for the 'id' parameter. However, it does not explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., campaign ID) or provide format/source guidance. The single parameter is common, so missing clarification is a notable gap.
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 clearly states the action 'resume a paused campaign' and specifies the resource (campaign) and scope ('reactivates all paused schedules'). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'pause_campaign'.
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 implies the tool is used on paused campaigns, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'pause_campaign' or 'schedule_campaign'. No guidance on prerequisites or conditions is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action and resource. Campaign lifecycle steps (create, update, delete, schedule, pause, resume) are clearly separate from contact management (add, remove, update tags) and provider/domain operations. No two tools have overlapping purposes.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., add_contact, check_domain_deliverability, delete_campaign_step). Mixing of singular/plural nouns (list_campaigns vs list_tags) is intentional and does not break consistency.
34 tools is high but justified for a full-featured email campaign server covering campaigns, contacts, providers, scheduling, deliverability, and task management. A few tools like check_email_spam_score and check_step_spam_score could be merged, but overall the count is reasonable.
The tool surface covers the complete CRM lifecycle: campaign CRUD, step management, contact CRUD with tags, provider setup, scheduling, deliverability checks, and spam analysis. Only minor gaps like per-campaign analytics or import/export exist, but core workflows are fully covered.