resume_state

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the resume action and a special case for query omission, but does not describe side effects, permissions, or output characteristics. The presence of an output schema is not leveraged in the description.

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 very short (11 words) and front-loaded, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It is not verbose, but the conciseness comes at the cost of clarity and completeness.

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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters, an output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on parameter interactions, return value, and when to use this tool over others, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The description vaguely references 'query' but does not explain the meaning or usage of 'query' or 'project'. No parameter details beyond the tool-level hint are provided.

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 uses a specific verb 'Resume' and identifies the resource 'state', and hints at a unique behavior ('omit query only for latest-checkpoint'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'checkpoint_state' or 'recall_relevant', which could also involve resuming.

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?

Only a single condition is provided ('omit query only for latest-checkpoint behavior'), without any when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to sibling tools. No explicit alternatives or context of appropriate use.

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