vm_resume

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. "Retrieve" implies a read, but it never states whether this is side-effect free, whether it mutates thread/checkpoint state, what happens if checkpoint_id is omitted, or what the "compact" return contains. The "fresh image" instruction is behavioral guidance but is too ambiguous to act on.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the retrieval purpose, so there is no bloat. The second sentence is concise but its vagueness makes it cost more confusion than it saves space, so structure is acceptable rather than good.

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?

A three-parameter tool with zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema leaves the agent without enough to call it correctly — in particular how checkpoint_id and owner_thread_id shape the result. The description should compensate for these gaps and does not.

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 all three parameters (vm, checkpoint_id, owner_thread_id) are undocumented in both schema and description. The phrase "resume point" loosely hints at checkpoint_id, but vm and owner_thread_id — including why the owner thread is required — are not explained at all.

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 gives a specific verb and object ("Retrieve a compact resume point and unresolved actions"), so the general intent is graspable. However, with 23 siblings including vm_observe, vm_status, and vm_connect, it never distinguishes what a "resume point" is or why this differs from just observing/connecting to a VM.

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 second sentence, "Always take a fresh image before further input," gestures at a precondition but names no tool or mechanism for "taking an image," leaving the agent to guess. No alternatives are named and no when-not-to-use condition is given.

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