nexo_workflow_resume

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It indicates a read operation ('summarize') and hints at output content (retry/approval gates), but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, describe side effects, or clarify return structure. It adequately discloses core behavior but lacks detail on permissions, errors, or data format.

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 12-word sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. Every word is informative; no waste. Ideal conciseness.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. It specifies the type of information returned (next step, retry/approval gates). Minor gaps: no mention of output format, error states, or potential failures, but overall sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The single parameter `run_id` is obvious from context, but the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description could have elaborated on how to obtain the run_id or its format. Baseline is 3 for a self-explanatory parameter, but no added value.

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?

Description clearly states the tool summarizes the next actionable step for a workflow run, specifying retry or approval gates. This verb-resource pair is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like nexo_workflow_get (which likely retrieves run details) and nexo_run_workflow (which starts a workflow).

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nexo_workflow_get, nexo_workflow_open). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it, which is needed given the many sibling workflow tools.

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