resume_connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It states the connection will resume syncing according to schedule, which is helpful, but does not mention behavioral traits like idempotency, error states if the connection is not paused, or any side effects. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 at two sentences, front-loading the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or wasted words.

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 simplicity (one parameter, output schema present), the description covers the essential behavior: resuming a paused connection and its scheduling effect. It lacks details on edge cases (e.g., resuming a non-paused connection) but is complete enough for typical use.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage and already describes 'connection_id' as the unique identifier. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 'Resume a paused Fivetran connection' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'pause_connection' and 'trigger_sync' by implying this is only for paused connections and respects the schedule.

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 specifies the tool is for resuming paused connections and that syncing follows the schedule, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., if the connection is already running) or mention alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear given the sibling set.

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