resume_working

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the pause is closed by recording a UTC instant, that the session keeps its original start, that non-paused sessions cause failure, and that no orientation block is re-fetched. This is unusually complete for a simple mutation.

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?

Two short paragraphs are front-loaded with the core action and effect, then failure behavior and sibling routing. Every sentence earns its place by clarifying semantics or routing, with no filler.

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?

There are no annotations and no output schema, so the description must supply the behavioral context, and it does: mutation effect, failure mode, session state preservation, and alternative tool guidance. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly appears missing.

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% for the single task_id parameter, so the schema already documents its meaning. The description does not add format, constraints, or usage nuance for task_id beyond what the schema provides, so 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 description states a specific verb and resource: resuming a paused work session by recording the return instant. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from start_working, which also resumes a paused session but re-fetches the orientation block. An agent can select it correctly without opening the sibling 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 gives the key condition for success (session must be paused) and states what happens otherwise: it fails rather than pretending to resume. It also names start_working as an alternative and clarifies the practical difference, leaving little to inference.

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