resume

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Read-only and idempotent: it never modifies the session'. It also details error behavior (malformed id rejected before network call, unknown/expired/revoked session returns error message). This complements the annotations which already include readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with the core purpose, then details contents, behavioral properties, usage guidance, format options, and error handling. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (fetches multiple context items) and no output schema, the description provides a complete picture: what is returned (prompt-ready text or raw JSON object), error conditions, and integration with sibling tools. It covers all essential aspects for an AI agent to correctly invoke the 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description still adds value: it explains the session_id pattern and how to obtain one, and clarifies the 'format' parameter with use cases for 'prompt-ready' and 'json', including the default and a reference to the JSON schema. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Fetch a UNIHODL session as Resume Context'. It specifies the content (open tabs, scroll positions, etc.) and distinguishes from sibling tool list_sessions by noting that this tool is for fetching context given a session_id, while list_sessions is for discovering sessions.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use it when you have a session_id... and need the human's working context before continuing their task'. It also directs to list_sessions for session discovery. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context is clear.

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