Resume Trader

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

The description adds the precondition 'previously paused' which is useful beyond the annotations. However, the annotations already indicate this is a write and idempotent operation, so the description adds limited extra behavioral context beyond the scope constraint.

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 sentence with no filler words. It effectively communicates the action and scope in minimal space.

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 simple one-parameter tool with annotations covering idempotency and mutability, the description adequately conveys the operation and its precondition. It could mention potential error cases (e.g., if trader is not paused) but that is not essential for this low-complexity 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?

The input schema already enumerates the one parameter 'wallet' with a clear description. The tool description reinforces the 'previously paused' context but does not add significant new 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 uses a specific verb 'Resume' and identifies the resource 'copy-trading' for a 'previously paused trader.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pause_trader or follow_trader.

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 'previously paused trader' provides clear context that this tool is intended for traders already paused via pause_trader. It implies the correct usage scenario, though it doesn't explicitly state exclusions or alternatives.

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