container_unpause

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the state precondition, failure mode, that processes resume from where they were frozen, and that State.Paused becomes false in the inspect payload. No contradictions with annotations.

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 tight and front-loaded: opening sentence states the core action, the second sentence adds the critical precondition and alternative, and the returns section is concise but useful. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 single-parameter, simple state-change operation with no output schema, this is complete: it communicates the action, the required container state, the failure mode, the alternative tool, and the return shape. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 explicitly defines the id_or_name parameter, its accepted formats, or examples. It only references 'a paused container' in passing, leaving the agent to infer that id_or_name is the container identifier. This does not adequately compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Resume all processes in a paused container', and explicitly positions it as the reverse of container_pause. It also distinguishes itself from container_start by clarifying what it is not for.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Only valid on a paused container', states the failure condition ('fails if the container is merely stopped'), and names the alternative ('use container_start for stopped containers'). This fully routes the agent to the correct sibling.

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