Resume rollout

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: an explicit production-confirmation gate and the fact that omitting it silently degrades the call to a dry run, which is a non-obvious safety behavior.

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 with no filler; the core action is front-loaded and the production constraint follows immediately. The parenthetical about the required percentage is tightly worded and earns its place.

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 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action, the required percentage, and the production safety gate. It leaves the relationship between the implicit dry run and the explicit validate_only parameter unaddressed, a minor ambiguity.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by flagging rollout_percentage as required and warning that the previous percentage is not carried over, and by restating the production/confirm_production coupling in behavioral terms rather than mechanical ones.

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 and resource ('Resumes a halted rollout') and names the key required input. It implicitly contrasts with halt_rollout, but never distinguishes itself from update_rollout, which likely also sets a rollout percentage, so sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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 a clear precondition for use (the rollout must be halted) and a clear production gating rule (confirm_production: true, otherwise dry run). It does not name alternatives such as update_rollout or promote_release, so the routing guidance stops short of explicit when-not coverage.

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