Resume Box

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'billable runtime' indicates cost implications and 'fresh machine' suggests potential hardware reassignment. Annotations already flag the tool as non-read-only and non-destructive, and the description enriches understanding without contradicting them.

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?

The description is a single, tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and outcome efficiently, earning a top score.

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?

Despite a clear purpose, the description omits explanations for the 'no_env' parameter and does not clarify post-resumption behavior. With three parameters and no output schema, the text is too sparse to be fully complete, though it covers the main action.

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 only 33% (only 'size' has a description), and the description does not explain any parameters. The meaning of 'no_env' and the effect of 'size' are left entirely to the schema, which is insufficient.

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 clearly states the tool resumes an archived Box, using the verb 'Resume' and specifying the resource as an 'archived Box.' It also mentions 'restarting billable runtime on a fresh machine,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like box_stop or box_create.

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 description implies the tool is for archived boxes, providing some context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like box_create or box_fork, nor does it mention exclusions or alternative tools.

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