Answer pending question

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

Annotations (openWorldHint, destructiveHint) are not contradicted; description adds behavioral context by explaining the two answering modes, though side effects are not elaborated.

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 sentences with no wasted words, front-loaded with main purpose, efficient and structured.

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 complexity (5 params, two operation types), description covers both scenarios, references prerequisite tool, and does not need output schema details.

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%, but description adds meaning by tying approved and value parameters to specific scenarios (approval vs input request), going beyond bare schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'answer' and resource 'run paused on human-input request', references sibling tool list_pending_inputs, and distinguishes two use cases (approval vs input request).

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 explicit guidance on when to use approved vs value parameters, and implies usage after list_pending_inputs. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but sufficient.

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