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. It declares 'Read-only,' which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose potential dependencies (e.g., whether prior load_context is required) or error conditions, leaving some ambiguity.

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 front-load the core function and content, then provide usage guidance and safety flag. Every sentence carries significant value; no redundant or extraneous text.

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 read-only tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the output content, usage distinction, and read-only nature. It lacks details on prerequisites or edge cases, but given the tool's similarity to load_context, it is reasonably 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 coverage for parameters is 100%, so the schema already documents them. The description adds context by mentioning 'different query or budget,' which reinforces the purpose of the query and budget parameters and explains their behavioral impact (full vs. stub summaries).

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 clearly states it generates a token-budgeted markdown resume with specific content (Task Passport state, git state, query-relevant records, gate warnings). It distinguishes itself from the sibling load_context by specifying when to use each (start vs. mid-session).

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?

Explicitly says 'Prefer load_context at task start; use resume for ad-hoc re-reads with a different query or budget mid-session.' This provides clear context on when to use this tool versus the alternative load_context.

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