resume_behavior_tree

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: the resume path goes through the AIController brain component or a UBehaviorTreeComponent, and it discloses the returned fields was_paused/is_paused. It does not explain the destructiveHint (what runtime AI state is discarded on resume) or what happens if the tree was never paused.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation and the pause_behavior_tree link before mechanism and world scoping. The component-path detail is useful rather than padding.

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?

With no output schema, disclosing was_paused/is_paused is the right call, and the editor-world/never-PIE scope is stated. Missing only edge-case behavior (already-running or never-paused trees), which matters for a destructiveHint=true 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 coverage is 100% and the actor_name description already covers pawn-or-AIController resolution. The description's mention of the component path marginally extends that, but it largely mirrors what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('resume a behavior tree') and explicitly anchors it to the sibling that produced the state, pause_behavior_tree. An agent can distinguish it from run/restart/stop_behavior_tree without opening any schema.

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 clearly states the precondition: the tree must have been paused by pause_behavior_tree, and it scopes the operation to editor-world actors only. It does not, however, contrast itself against restart_behavior_tree or get_behavior_tree_status for overlapping cases.

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