resume_print

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly identifies a state-changing action and target scope, but it does not disclose behavior when no print is paused, whether the operation is idempotent, or if resuming on 'all' skips printers with no paused job. This is a minimal viable disclosure, not a rich one.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: the action, the target state, and the scope.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the basic purpose but leaves gaps around error handling, idempotency, and what happens with 'all'. The missing behavioral and usage context makes it adequate but not fully complete.

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 the input schema already documents 'printer' as an ID, 'all', or optional. The description repeats the 'all' case but adds no new semantics, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Resume') and resource ('paused print'), and it defines the scope ('on a printer (or all printers)'), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like pause_print, start_print, and stop_print. It is not a tautology and conveys the core action immediately.

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?

The phrase 'Resume a paused print' implies the tool should be used when a print is paused, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as start_print or stop_print, nor does it mention 'all' as a bulk operation beyond the schema. This is adequate implicit guidance, not explicit routing.

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