tv_resume_alerts

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

Annotations already indicate mutation and destructiveness; the description adds useful context by revealing that webhooks are re-enabled, that the response contains per-id previous/current state read from the server, and that the operation is reversible via tv_pause_alerts. It does not contradict the annotations and provides meaningful beyond-schema behavior.

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?

Three compact sentences front-load the mutation verb and effect, then cover return values, reversibility, and a verification note. There is no filler or repetition; each clause adds information useful to the agent.

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?

With a fully documented schema, safety annotations, and no output schema, the description supplies the missing return-shape summary and the key side-effect warning about webhooks. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly without external documentation.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters. The description's 'per-id' note concerns output rather than parameter meaning, so the description does not need to compensate. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 precise verb ('restart (resume)') and resource ('the given alerts'), and explains the concrete effect ('they begin firing again, webhooks included'). It also ties directly to AlertsCollection.restartAlerts and differentiates itself from tv_pause_alerts by noting the inverse relationship.

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 intended use is clear: resume alerts that were paused, with tv_pause_alerts explicitly identified as the reverse operation. It lacks a full 'do not use when...' exclusion list, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select this tool correctly among siblings.

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