resume_print

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and excels: it reveals that resume returns the nozzle and continues extruding, that the printer state is verified afterward, that silently ignored commands are reported as failures, and that force bypasses the internal state check. These are non-obvious behavioral details an agent needs.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: a one-sentence summary, a short prerequisite/behavior paragraph, then per-parameter details. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no filler.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers prerequisites, action consequences, edge cases, verification behavior, and parameter semantics. It gives an agent everything needed to decide whether and how to call 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 input schema provides no descriptions, yet the Args section thoroughly explains both parameters. force gets context for when and why to use it, and printer_name clearly states the omission default and the requirement to match the name used for pausing.

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 opens with the specific verb-and-resource action, 'Resume a paused print job,' and adds behavioral specificity: 'return the nozzle to its previous position and continue extruding.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like pause_print, cancel_print, start_print, and firmware_resume_print.

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?

It explicitly states the prerequisite that the printer must be in a paused state and explains when to use the force parameter. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say 'use X instead,' but the context is clear enough to guide correct invocation.

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