airflow_unpause_dag

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (mutation). The description adds that it sets is_paused=False and returns a response dict, clarifying the state change. It also discloses error format (ToolError with JSON payload). This is good context beyond annotations, though it doesn't mention potential side effects like triggering downstream tasks.

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 highly concise, with a one-line summary followed by a bulleted parameter list and return value info. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. Structure is clear and easy to scan.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers return values, error handling, and parameter relationships. It lacks details on permissions or when to prefer alternative tools, but for a three-parameter tool with annotations, it is largely 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter: instance (optional, mutually exclusive with ui_url), ui_url (optional, takes precedence), dag_id (required if ui_url not provided). This adds critical constraints and meaning beyond the schema's bare types and defaults.

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 resumes DAG scheduling by setting is_paused=False, which distinguishes it from siblings like airflow_pause_dag (pauses) and airflow_trigger_dag (triggers a run). The verb 'resume' combined with the specific resource 'DAG scheduling' provides a precise action.

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 description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks statements about prerequisites, when not to use, or comparisons to related tools like airflow_pause_dag or airflow_trigger_dag. The parameter documentation partially implies resolution logic but no strategic usage context.

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