colab_resume_notebook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly warns that 'prior RAM, processes, and leases are invalid' and states that dependencies/files are restored, providing key side-effect information. It does not cover return format or permission requirements, but the critical invalidation warning is clearly disclosed.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by a critical warning. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description explains the core behavior and the primary risk (state invalidation) but omits guidance on when to use it and what the tool returns. It is adequate but leaves gaps in practical usage context.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the input schema already provides; the mention of 'restore dependencies/files' is not clearly tied to any specific parameter.

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 the tool resumes a notebook onto a fresh runtime and restores dependencies/files, which distinguishes it from siblings like colab_start or colab_execute_notebook by emphasizing the 'resume' action and fresh-runtime scope. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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 verb 'resume' implies usage after a pause or interruption, but the description provides no explicit when-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives. It lacks a clear statement of when to choose this over similar tools like colab_start or colab_execute_notebook.

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