resume_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the agent already knows this mutates and reaches an external/open world; the description is consistent with that. It adds that retrying a completed run adds new records, but does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, or what wait_seconds actually does behaviorally.

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?

A single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the primary action and lists the three modes without filler. It is appropriately sized, though the three modes could be slightly more clearly delimited.

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 explained, and the description covers the main invocation modes. It is adequate but thin for a mutating, open-world tool with a wait parameter whose blocking behavior is never mentioned.

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 is 67%: run_id and retry_failed_sources are described in the schema, while wait_seconds has only a default/min/max. The description adds conceptual meaning to retry modes but explains none of the parameters beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 three specific operations (check a running search, retry a failed one, retry failed sources of a completed run) with the resource clearly being a 'search'. It is distinguishable from start_search (which initiates) and get_run_status (status read-only), though the 'check a running search' clause overlaps somewhat with get_run_status and no sibling is named explicitly.

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 three modes imply when to use the tool (running, failed, completed-with-failures), giving useful context. However, it never names an alternative tool or states when NOT to use it, and the boundary with get_run_status for the 'check a running search' case is left to inference.

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