Resume tracked queries

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: budget is consumed again, skipped checks are permanently lost, failures are reported in 'failed', and retries are safe. It reinforces idempotentHint and clarifies the cost and irreversibility of the operation.

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?

Four tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the main action and limit. Each sentence adds distinct value—cost, irreversibility, failure reporting, retry safety—with no wasted words.

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 mutation complexity and lack of output schema, the description covers cost, skipped-check consequences, failure reporting, and retry safety well. It falls short only on explaining the required organization/project scope parameters, which is a non-trivial gap at 0% schema coverage.

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. It only partially does: 'up to 100 paused tracked queries' clarifies the trackedQueryIds array and its limit, but organizationId and projectId are never mentioned, leaving their scope and purpose undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb ('Restart') and resource ('checks of up to 100 paused tracked queries'), with a built-in limit. An agent can immediately distinguish it from the sibling pause_tracked_queries.

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?

Provides clear usage context: use get_usage afterward to see budget impact, and 'Safe to retry' tells the agent retries are fine. It doesn't explicitly say when not to use it or name the pause counterpart, but the implied condition (paused queries) is clear.

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