resume_record

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. It states the action but does not disclose what happens if the recording is not paused (e.g., error, no-op), whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. For a state-changing tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, concise sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple (no params, no output schema), and the description covers its primary purpose. However, it does not mention any prerequisites or failure behavior, and it does not clarify how it differs from toggle_record_pause, leaving some contextual ambiguity for an agent selecting between them.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies, and there is no omission.

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 recording.' uses a specific verb and resource, making it clear that this tool resumes a previously paused recording. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like pause_record, toggle_record_pause, start_record, and stop_record by focusing solely on the resume action.

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 usage when a recording is paused ('a paused recording'), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as toggle_record_pause, which can also resume. The usage context is implied rather than fully articulated.

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