resume_bot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the mutation effect ('Write: automations start replying again.') and implies that the bot was previously paused. It does not discuss edge cases like idempotency or behavior if the bot is already resumed, but for a simple state-change tool this is sufficient.

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 three short sentences with no filler. The core purpose and prerequisite are front-loaded, and the effect is stated in a compact, scannable way.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, precondition, parameter provenance, and behavioral effect. It does not mention errors or confirmation behavior, but nothing essential for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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?

The input schema only provides `user_ns` as a required string with no description, so schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates by identifying `user_ns` as coming from `find_contact`, giving the agent a concrete source for the value. It does not specify format or examples, but with a single parameter this is a meaningful improvement over the schema alone.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resume') with a clear resource ('the bot') and scope ('for one contact'), and explicitly references the complementary action `pause_bot`. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling tools like pause_bot and find_contact.

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?

It states the correct timing ('after `pause_bot`') and tells the agent exactly where to obtain the required `user_ns` ('from `find_contact`'). This gives clear operational guidance for when and how to use the tool.

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