Resume charging

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it flags the state mutation up front ('CHANGES STATE'), names the exact protocol command in the app or this server (507), specifies the required charger state, and discloses that invalid calls return an explanation rather than erroring opaquely. Combined with idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, an agent has a full behavioral picture.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the most important fact (state-changing operation) is front-loaded before the precondition. Every clause carries distinct information.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers the mutation nature, the command semantics, the required state, and failure behavior. Nothing needed to invoke this correctly 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the single charger_id parameter (including its default resolution logic) is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond it, so this sits at the baseline.

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 (resume) and resource (a paused charging session), plus the underlying Zaptec command 507. The pairing with 'paused via the app or this server' clearly distinguishes it from the sibling zaptec_pause_charging.

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 an explicit precondition (charger must be connected_finished with final_stop_active) and states the fallback behavior when it isn't met. It implies the alternative (pause_charging) but never names it or spells out when to prefer resume over other state-changing siblings.

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