Resume service

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

Annotations declare it is a non-destructive mutation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds genuinely new context: it requires services:manage, a full-access API key, and a suspended target. It also notes a tracking event ID is returned, useful since there is no output schema.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and state change, then preconditions, then auth. Every sentence carries information; only the restatement of state change is mildly redundant with the opening.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers action, resulting state, platform restriction, precondition, auth requirements, and return value. It omits only error/edge behavior (e.g., what happens if the service is not suspended), a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so the single orderNo parameter (with pattern, length, and example) is fully documented in the schema. The description adds only the implicit notion that the target must be a suspended VDS/Cloud VPS order, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Resume a suspended Cloud VPS (KVM/VDS) service') and the resulting state change ('back to running'), which distinguishes it from start_service/restart_service. It does not name a sibling alternative explicitly, so it stops 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?

Gives clear preconditions and scope: 'the service must be suspended' and 'VDS/Cloud VPS only'. This tells the agent when the call is valid and when it is not, though it never names the alternative to use for a non-suspended service.

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