cast_resume

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. There is no mention of what happens if playback is already running, if no cast session exists, or what the tool returns. The description is consistent with the annotations but adds no value beyond them.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence adequately describes a zero-parameter command. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 simple zero-parameter tool with informative annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it omits useful context such as the prerequisite state (playback must be paused), possible edge cases, and what a successful resume implies. Adequate for a basic call, but not fully complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing the description needs to explain about inputs. The baseline of 4 applies because the schema fully covers the empty parameter set.

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 uses a specific verb ('Reprend' / resume) and a clear resource ('la lecture du cast'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It is implicitly distinguished from sibling commands like cast_pause and cast_stop, though it does not explicitly name an alternative. A clear, if minimal, statement.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus cast_play, cast_start, or cast_seek. The intended usage (resuming after a pause) is only implied by the tool name and sibling context. An agent receives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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