Resume an Evergreen queue

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety bar is lower. The description usefully adds that the next occurrence is recomputed from the current time — implying skipped occurrences may be dropped — but it never explains what the destructive flag actually affects or what state is lost.

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?

One short sentence with the action front-loaded and the side effect trailing it. Nothing is wasted or restated from the title.

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?

This is a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world mutation with no output schema and no documented parameters. The description omits preconditions, permission requirements, consequence of the destructive flag, and any indication of what a successful resume returns, which is too thin for a tool of this risk profile.

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 0% and the description never mentions queueId, its format, or how to obtain a valid one. With a destructive, non-idempotent mutation the single parameter carries real weight, and the description does nothing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 names a specific verb (resume) and resource (paused queue) and adds a concrete side effect — recomputing the next occurrence from the current time. It does not, however, distinguish this from sibling tools like activate_evergreen_queue or pause_evergreen_queue, leaving the resume-vs-activate distinction to inference.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'paused', which suggests a precondition but never states it as a requirement. There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over activate_evergreen_queue, and no note on what happens if the queue is not currently paused.

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