atlas_resume_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses a non-obvious state gate (interrupted vs paused), which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about permissions, what happens if the run_id is not in an interrupted state, or reversibility of the resume.

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 short sentence with the precondition front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the key precondition is covered. Still, for a state-mutating tool with no annotations, the description leaves error behavior and permission requirements unaddressed.

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 0% and the description never mentions run_id, so neither source explains the parameter's format or origin. Compensation for the coverage gap is absent, though the parameter's meaning is close to self-evident from its name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource in Chinese: resume a run. The scope qualifier ('only runs dynamically judged as interrupted') sharpens the action beyond the bare name. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like atlas_cancel_run or atlas_get_run by name or contrast.

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?

Explicitly states the condition for use (only interrupted runs) and the when-not case (paused runs must go through Web approval). This routes the agent to the correct path before it ever calls the tool, which is exactly what usage guidance should do.

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