sandbox_resume

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

The description discloses that resuming restores filesystem and running processes, which is good behavioral context. However, it does not mention potential side effects, required permissions, or error conditions (e.g., what happens if sandbox is not paused). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, and while it adds value, it could be more comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that efficiently communicate the action and key behavioral details. Every sentence adds value with no 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 is a simple resume operation with 2 parameters (100% schema coverage), no output schema, and minimal complexity, the description provides sufficient context. It covers purpose, state restoration, and parameter usage. Missing error details or prerequisites, but overall adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 both parameters are already fully described in the schema. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema, but it implicitly confirms that sandboxId is required and timeoutMs is optional. 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 clearly states the action ('Resume'), the resource ('a previously paused sandbox'), and provides specific details about what the resume operation entails: reconnecting and restoring state including filesystem and running processes. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like sandbox_pause and sandbox_kill.

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?

While the description implicitly indicates this should be used only for paused sandboxes, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., not for running or killed sandboxes) nor name alternatives. However, the context is clear enough for an AI agent to infer appropriate usage.

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