ezd_koszulka_resume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only states the action and resource, without disclosing the resulting state change, side effects, reversibility, permissions required, or whether the operation can fail or is idempotent.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundant information. It front-loads the core action and target resource, making it easy to scan.

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?

This is a state-changing operation with no annotations and no output schema, and the description does not explain what happens to the koszulka when resumed, what the response contains, or what conditions must be true for the action to succeed. Essential context for safe invocation is missing.

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 all five parameters are already documented in the input schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already provides sufficient semantics for each parameter.

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 states a specific action ('Wznow' - resume) applied to a specific resource ('zakonczona koszulke' - a closed koszulka) in the EZD PUW system. It differentiates from siblings like ezd_koszulka_close by indicating this tool reopens a closed item, though it does not name alternative tools directly.

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?

Usage context is implied: use this tool to resume a closed koszulka. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to sibling tools that might handle related states or operations.

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