resume_execution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Resume' implies a state change on an existing workflow, but the description doesn't disclose side effects, whether the operation is reversible, what state the workflow must be in (paused vs. failed vs. completed), or whether any validation occurs on the executionId.

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?

A single, efficient sentence with zero waste. Directly states the action and resource. There's no preamble, filler, or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a state-changing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain what happens after resuming (does it continue from pause point?), error conditions, or required preconditions. A paired tool exists (pause_execution) suggesting an orchestration lifecycle, but no context is provided about how this fits in.

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 100% for the single parameter (executionId), which already describes 'ID of the workflow execution'. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully covers the parameter.

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 'Resume a paused workflow execution' clearly states the verb (resume) and resource (paused workflow execution). It distinguishes from siblings like pause_execution and start_workflow. Could be more specific about what resuming entails, but the basic purpose is clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling tools include pause_execution, start_workflow, and manage_execution, but the description doesn't clarify how resume_execution differs from starting a fresh workflow or when resume is appropriate. No context on prerequisites or state requirements.

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