Unsuspend Reseller User

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the authentication-mode constraint (reseller vs impersonated user), which annotations cannot express, plus the 404 semantics. The idempotency sentence largely restates the idempotentHint annotation, so the added value is real but partly duplicative.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the effect, followed by idempotency and the auth constraint. No filler or redundant restatement of the name.

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 full annotations and an output schema, the description covers effect, idempotency, auth mode and the main error case. The only missing piece is the exact meaning of the username argument relative to the acting reseller.

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% (pattern, length bounds, and a description are all present), so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the framing that the call is made as the reseller, and does not clarify whether `username` names the target reseller user or the acting reseller — a small residual ambiguity the schema does not resolve.

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 and resource: 'Reverses the suspension of a reseller user, restoring their access.' This clearly separates it from the sibling suspend_reseller_user and from the CRUD siblings (get/update/delete_reseller_user).

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 concrete usage context: call while authenticated as the reseller (plain reseller username), not while impersonating a user. It also notes the 404 case for a non-existent user. What it lacks is an explicit pointer to the suspend counterpart or any precondition such as 'only meaningful if the user is currently suspended'.

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