resume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. 'Resume' implies a state change, but the description does not disclose whether the action is reversible, requires authentication, or has side effects like discarding buffered commands. The confirm requirement is a small behavioral note but insufficient for a mutating action.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the main action. The confirm requirement is included, and there is no wasted text. It could be improved with more context, but it is appropriately sized.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and a single required parameter, the description must explain both the action and its implications. It only covers the basic action and the confirm requirement, omitting details like error conditions, effect on print history, or what happens if the printer is not paused. For a state-changing tool, this is incomplete.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter semantics are fully documented in the schema. The description adds a minor behavioral note ('Requires confirm: true') but no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 the verb 'Resume' and resource 'a paused print', which is clear enough. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'start' or 'pause', though the context of 'paused print' implies it. It lacks detail on scope or effect.

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 implies when to use it (when a print is paused) and mentions a requirement (confirm: true), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The sibling list includes 'pause' and 'stop', but no guidance on choosing between them is given.

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