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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the context of resuming after interruption but does not detail side effects like recorded restore events or state overwriting. It does not contradict the annotations, and with annotations present, the minimal behavioral disclosure is acceptable.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every word adds value: it states what the tool does and when to invoke it.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, output schema, destructive annotation), the description provides the essential purpose and usage trigger. The schema and output schema fill in the technical details, so the description is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call it, though it could have briefly mentioned the need for a snapshot ID or the related create_restart_snapshot 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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already fully documents all 9 parameters. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable because the schema is self-sufficient.

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 tool resumes previous work from a saved snapshot, with the verb 'Resume' and resource 'saved snapshot'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_restart_snapshot, which creates snapshots, and restore_memory, which handles general memory restoration.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Call this when the user asks to resume/restart or after context loss.' This is a clear trigger condition, though it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives explicitly beyond the implied context.

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