resume_vm

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 disclosure. It only states the action and does not mention that this is a state-changing operation, potential errors, prerequisites, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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 exceptionally concise: one action sentence plus a short Args line. No filler or redundant information; every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema, and the description covers the core action and parameter. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral details, making it adequate but not complete for an agent to invoke confidently in all situations.

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 provides only the parameter name and type with no description, so the description's 'The VM identifier' adds basic meaning. It clarifies the purpose of vm_id but not its format or constraints, providing only minimal compensation for the 0% schema coverage.

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 'resume' with a resource 'suspended virtual machine', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like suspend_vm and start_vm. It precisely states what the tool does without ambiguity.

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 phrase 'suspended virtual machine' gives clear context on when to use the tool: only for VMs in a suspended state. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear for a simple operation.

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