Skip to main content
Glama

Resume workspace

workspace_resume
DestructiveIdempotent

Resume all paused resources in a workspace for its owner and report what was resumed or skipped, including reasons.

Instructions

Use this when the workspace owner wants to start again everything they paused in a workspace. Owner only. Returns what was resumed and what was skipped, with why.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>"
    },
    "name": "workspace_resume"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workspaceIdYesWorkspace ID (see workspace_list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already disclose that this is a non-read-only, idempotent, destructive operation. The description adds useful context beyond that: owner-only authorization and partial success behavior via returned resumed/skipped items with reasons. It does not explain why the operation is flagged destructive or what side effects/costs resumption may cause.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short, front-loaded sentences: usage condition, authorization constraint, and return behavior. Every sentence adds useful information with no repetition or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter mutation, the description covers the key missing pieces: owner-only access and partial-result reporting. Annotations cover safety traits, so the main remaining gap is the absence of explicit dependency or side-effect detail for workspace-wide resume behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already explaining that workspaceId comes from workspace_list. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: resuming everything paused in a workspace. It is clear enough to distinguish from workspace_pause, but it does not explicitly contrast with project_resume or service_resume, which are sibling tools with overlapping resume semantics.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a clear usage condition: when the workspace owner wants to restart everything paused in a workspace, and adds an owner-only restriction. It lacks explicit when-not guidance or named alternatives such as project_resume for narrower scope.

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