resume_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: not whether the operation is idempotent, what state the task must be in, whether it requires permissions, or what happens on an already-running task. For a state-mutating control tool this is a severe gap.

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 two-word bilingual phrase is short but under-specified rather than concise; it is not front-loaded with any useful information because there is none to front-load.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, an undocumented required parameter, and a rich sibling set of task-control tools, the definition is far too thin for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 single required parameter robot_sn has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or explains whether it is a serial number, an ID, or where to obtain it. Nothing compensates for the schema gap.

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 'Resume task' is essentially a restatement of the tool name resume_task, adding no verb nuance, scope, or resource detail. With siblings like start_task, pause_task, and resume_navigation in the set, no attempt is made to distinguish what 'resume' means here versus starting or navigating.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. the task must currently be paused), and no mention of alternatives such as start_task or resume_navigation. The agent is left to infer everything from the name alone.

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