mailchimp_campaigns_resume

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral effects, but it only says 'resume' without explaining what actually changes (e.g., status transition, scheduling behavior) or prerequisites beyond being paused. For a mutation tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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, direct sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the structure is optimally front-loaded.

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 without an output schema, the description conveys the essential action but omits details like what a successful resume does to the campaign status or possible error conditions. It is minimally sufficient but not rich.

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 schema already documents campaign_id with a clear description, and the tool description adds no further parameter meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 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?

The verb 'resume' immediately conveys the action, and the object 'paused RSS campaign' specifies both the target and its state. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pause, send, and schedule.

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 precondition (campaign must be paused) and the campaign type (RSS), offering clear usage context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is narrow enough that this does not seem necessary.

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